Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[blaydRnr]

Jim is right. From the regs:
hatchery trout … in some waters, hatchery
trout may be harvested but wild trout must
be released. In these waters, hatchery trout
are marked before stocking by removal of
their adipose fin (see illustration on p. 10).
Therefore, these hatchery trout must have
a healed scar in place of the missing fin.

If there is anything there that looks like a fin it is not a hatchery fish according to the law and it must be released.
I doesn't matter if it is a clean cut, or if it is 1/2 a fin, or 1/4 of a fin.

not true...

I just spent the past hour trying to get a hold of someone who would give me a definite answer...and guess what?...no one wanted to take the responsibility for being accountable.

here's the list of people and places i contacted:

DFO (Ottawa) 604 666 0384
Vedder River Hatchery 604 858 7227
Capilano Hatchery 604 666 1790

Surrey Division DFO 604 582 5200 (redirected to bio division and hatchery.. Aaron Stotter)
Aaron Stotter 1 800 663 9453 (redirected to Veronica Russell/management systems)
Veronica Russell 604 582 5222  (lower mainland marketing and management systems for fisheries)...redirected (without phone number to Ian Lund)
Ian Lund (wildlife game and fish /field specialist)...no reply redirected to voicemail.

another number given was Gerry Korvo (i forgot what division he was in) 250 756 7128... also grey area for him.

IF IN DOUBT RELEASE THE FISH...but from a legal stand point...according to these "so called" officials...a hatchery fish is marked by the absence of the adipose fin and in its place a healed scar showing a clear lateral line running along the base of where the adipose fin should be...

HOWEVER, they also believe miss clips do occur and in these cases (and they do specify their "personal opinion"...but NOT 100% sure)... the fish constitutes the marking of a hatchery fish.

the only exception is the obvious sign of trauma/laceration/gash/bites (fully healed or not) ... where NO SIGNS OF ANY CLEAN CLIPPING is evident, fish must be released unharmed.

[typhoon]

How is my statement "not true"?
You are taking a chance with a CO who understands misclips and believes that your particular fish is a misclip, otherwise you are a poacher.

[skaha]

--why put fisheries and yourself in this type of grief.
--you're forcing the officer to exercise their discreation... that does not mean they have to say yes. It does not mean that if yo go to court you will get a different interpretation.

--this comes down to the perception of being innocent which is a higher standard than not being found guilty. I would rather, when checked or not feel that I have not broken the law or the intent of the law.

--so ask yourself is it more important that you keep the fish that may be a natural when the intent is to protect the natural or is it more important to keep a fish that may or may not be hatchery stock.

--I would likely let the fish go if in doubt

[bederko]

perfectly legal to retain misclipped  fish...

This is the part I originally had issue with.  You are encouraging others, or just justifying yourself, to judge whether a fish (steelhead in this instance) is wild or hatchery.  Why bother?  Is everyone that desperate to keep a fish?  If there is any doubt whatsoever, let it go. 

so if what i wrote was MISCONSTRUED then NO HARM would have come to any fish because THEY DON'T CLIP THE DORSAL FIN....DUMB*SS!

and if you're so passionate about getting the facts impeccably right why didn't you make an attempt to correct me rather than bash my good intent... SO NOW IT'S MY TURN TO CALL YOU OUT... i see nothing on your post that was remotely productive.

I don't believe any of this post needs to be replied to.  I don't appreciate the yelling or the name calling.  Please don't ever fish anywhere near me...

[jetboatjim]

I guess all adipose fins are all identical ? I have seen true wild fish (in areas with no hatchery introduction) with very, I mean very small adipose fins or miss formed adipose fins....so some of the info given here seems to say it's ok to kill them ?
Rember in the court systems in B.C. you have to prove your Innocent, this may mean traveling, and taking days off work just to explain to a judge that a guy on the internet said its ok to kill a fish with a half an adipose fin.....I'm sure he will agree.

do you need to kill every one you catch ?

[younggun]

nope.

[blaydRnr]

This is the part I originally had issue with.  You are encouraging others, or just justifying yourself, to judge whether a fish (steelhead in this instance) is wild or hatchery.  Why bother?  Is everyone that desperate to keep a fish?  If there is any doubt whatsoever, let it go. 

I don't believe any of this post needs to be replied to.  I don't appreciate the yelling or the name calling.  Please don't ever fish anywhere near me...

i don't mind being criticized and corrected...the issue i had was with you calling me ignorant because of a typing error...all you had to do was point out my mistake and i would have conceited and retracted my statement.

for my name calling, i apologize...but as far as fishing goes i fish where i please..not looking for trouble, but also not declining to hostility.

[blaydRnr]

I guess all adipose fins are all identical ? I have seen true wild fish (in areas with no hatchery introduction) with very, I mean very small adipose fins or miss formed adipose fins....so some of the info given here seems to say it's ok to kill them ?
Rember in the court systems in B.C. you have to prove your Innocent, this may mean traveling, and taking days off work just to explain to a judge that a guy on the internet said its ok to kill a fish with a half an adipose fin.....I'm sure he will agree.

do you need to kill every one you catch ?

as my previous post stated, i attempted to contact the Department of Fisheries to get conclusive answers...i also stated "If in doubt release the fish".

not all adipose fins are identical...true...but rivers with no hatchery programs also have very strict guidelines when it comes to retention...the issue here is the determination of what constitutes a hatchery or wild fish.

the broodstock program was put in place to give fishers the opportunity for retention..hatchery fish are meant to be killed...it's not about encouraging people to kill indiscriminately for the sake of killing, but to help them decipher and learn the rules and regulations.

In ANY court of law you are INNOCENT until proven guilty.

For myself, i only retain fish that i can eat (without every stocking my freezer)...and i release just as many hatchery fish as wild.

[blaydRnr]

This is the part I originally had issue with.  You are encouraging others, or just justifying yourself, to judge whether a fish (steelhead in this instance) is wild or hatchery.  Why bother?  Is everyone that desperate to keep a fish?  If there is any doubt whatsoever, let it go. 

I encourage people to learn the rules and regulations and ask questions when they're unclear ...not to speculate based on one's ethical beliefs.

if you truly believe people are desperate to kill a fish then they probably won't target steelheads because everyone who fishes them know it's a hit and miss fishery with very limited retention.

A question was posted...and i tried to help the best way i could..and even going beyond by calling long distance as not to mislead or misguide anyone...so you can keep criticizing me, but please think twice before you miss label my intentions and accuse me of encouraging others to do misdeeds... that in itself is irresponsible and bias.

[blaydRnr]

How is my statement "not true"?
You are taking a chance with a CO who understands misclips and believes that your particular fish is a misclip, otherwise you are a poacher.

not true in the sense of your specs...if what you say is accurate then please correct me and attach where it is stated on the fresh water synopsis or regs...whether it be on the DFO website or any other government site.

with all the phone calls i made, surely one of the offices/divisions would have directed me to this act...it would have made my life easier and put the question to rest...and i would have stand corrected with an apology to follow.

[typhoon]

not true in the sense of your specs...if what you say is accurate then please correct me and attach where it is stated on the fresh water synopsis or regs...whether it be on the DFO website or any other government site.

with all the phone calls i made, surely one of the offices/divisions would have directed me to this act...it would have made my life easier and put the question to rest...and i would have stand corrected with an apology to follow.

I copied it directly from the FW synopsis p96:
http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/fw/fish/regulations/docs/0911/fish-synopsis_2009-11_part2.pdf

[fly fisher]

wow i didn't expect this to go out of hand. i just was wondering if it actually happens because this is the first time i have heard of it.