In law and court judgment, the INTENT of an action is everything. It can mean the difference of staying in prison for life or being set free. If DFO sets the legal codes governing what they consider is snagging and yet does not prosecute anyone flossing, then (I guess, as I am not their spokesman ) they must intend to define snagging as AN INTENT to hook fish in any part of the body other than the mouth. In which case, flossing does not qualify, because the intent of flossing is to target the mouth of a fish.
In fact in any sockeye bars, the incident of hooking a fish by other body parts is a rare thing. Flossing does not foul hook fish as much as float fishing or flyfishing in places of high fish concentration. During the pink season, floaters and flyfishers can snag into a fish almost every other pass. You don't see that in flossing with that kind of frequency. So in term of causing harm to a fish by accidental snagging into a fish, flossing is less than other methods. Does this mean we should ban floating & flyfishing during pink season?
Considering fish are caught in many other ways all over the world including Canada (Oolichans & smelts are netted or scooped, eels & lobsters in the Eastern shore are trapped, etc), the fanatic insistence that fish has to be biting in order to be harvested is a narrow point of view. It is a product of a well-fed society of the West. The starving people of the world can look at the affluent & well fed Canadians who turn their back on this God given (or nature, if you are atheist) bounty of the sea, because of a narrow vision about fishing, and weep. They will probably ask Heaven why so unfair. Why shouldn't they? You want to trade places with them? Count your blessings men. If the bears, the eagles, the natives and what have u are benefiting from this bounty, why not the average joes? Should the bears claw, bite or crush the fish with their body? Should the eagles claw, beak or plunge to catch a fish? Which way is more acceptable? The average joes are already down to one rod, one barbless hook, and limited days or time to catch a fish, what else you need to strip of him to make him fishless?
This bounty should be regulated and preserved by careful stock management. But when DFO gives the legal opening after stock conservation quota is met, why abstain if DFO does not consider flossing as snagging which they sure prosecute? I would rather catch the fish & give it to needy person, such as a widow or senior.
Poll
20 (29%)
Author
Topic: 2007 Fraser River selective fishing method request notice (Read 61094 times)