Print

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

[Rodney]

we posted basically at the same time rod so don't hassle me but that bull trout you caught was a beaut.

The river mouth and CPR bridge are not the same. Take the advice to avoid issues in the future.

[bbronswyk2000]

Like Rod said the CPR bridge is the tidal boundary.

[steve B]

oh crap i thought it was tidal so i need a freshwater license i have to get the steelhead tag too is there a freshwater salmon tag also Hey thanks for the info rod i appreciate it

[steve B]

is there a summer run of steelies in the stave? i know they spawn in the spring so mid march would that be a good time to get out to the river ?

[clarki]

Read above. Don't post what you believe, rather what you know. You do not want to be responsible for giving out incorrect information that may lead to violations by those who are misinformed.

While I agree in part, Rod, I mostly disagree. It is always the responsibility of the person getting the information second hand who who bears the onus to verify its veracity.   I agree that we all should strive to provide as accurate information as possible, however if you are unsure, it's OK and recommended to provide the caveat "I believe". Many times I find members guesses to be very helpful as it provides me with a different way of looking at something.

I've read posts by member of this forum offering advice on fishing regualtions, jet maintenance, legal issues with Canada Customs, or how to walk to the Vedder mouth from Island 22. Some are accurate, some might not be. On low risk issues, such as angling tactics, its OK to take advice at face value; if the advice was wrong, no harm was done except for a fishless day. On weightier issues, such as the ones that I mentioned above, where the risks of applying wrong information are higher, the recipient of the advice needs to exercise caution, get other first hand information, and accept responsibility if it was wrong.

I know there are some folks that have a learning disability and might need some assistance to understand and apply the regs, or others who want some advice on a topic that they are unsure about and look to others with more expertise in that matter. However it is still advisable to take the advice for what it is, just advice, and to check it our first hand.

Opinions are like arseholes, everyone's got one. This forum is a wonderful source of information, but it is still your personal responsibility to exercise due diligence where the risks dictate to.

[fly fisher]

While I agree in part, Rod, I mostly disagree. It is always the responsibility of the person getting the information second hand who who bears the onus to verify its veracity.   I agree that we all should strive to provide as accurate information as possible, however if you are unsure, it's OK and recommended to provide the caveat "I believe". Many times I find members guesses to be very helpful as it provides me with a different way of looking at something.

I've read posts by member of this forum offering advice on fishing regualtions, jet maintenance, legal issues with Canada Customs, or how to walk to the Vedder mouth from Island 22. Some are accurate, some might not be. On low risk issues, such as angling tactics, its OK to take advice at face value; if the advice was wrong, no harm was done except for a fishless day. On weightier issues, such as the ones that I mentioned above, where the risks of applying wrong information are higher, the recipient of the advice needs to exercise caution, get other first hand information, and accept responsibility if it was wrong.

I know there are some folks that have a learning disability and might need some assistance to understand and apply the regs, or others who want some advice on a topic that they are unsure about and look to others with more expertise in that matter. However it is still advisable to take the advice for what it is, just advice, and to check it our first hand.

Opinions are like arseholes, everyone's got one. This forum is a wonderful source of information, but it is still your personal responsibility to exercise due diligence where the risks dictate to.

thankyou clarki

[Rodney]

While I agree in part, Rod, I mostly disagree. It is always the responsibility of the person getting the information second hand who who bears the onus to verify its veracity.   I agree that we all should strive to provide as accurate information as possible, however if you are unsure, it's OK and recommended to provide the caveat "I believe". Many times I find members guesses to be very helpful as it provides me with a different way of looking at something.

I've read posts by member of this forum offering advice on fishing regualtions, jet maintenance, legal issues with Canada Customs, or how to walk to the Vedder mouth from Island 22. Some are accurate, some might not be. On low risk issues, such as angling tactics, its OK to take advice at face value; if the advice was wrong, no harm was done except for a fishless day. On weightier issues, such as the ones that I mentioned above, where the risks of applying wrong information are higher, the recipient of the advice needs to exercise caution, get other first hand information, and accept responsibility if it was wrong.

I know there are some folks that have a learning disability and might need some assistance to understand and apply the regs, or others who want some advice on a topic that they are unsure about and look to others with more expertise in that matter. However it is still advisable to take the advice for what it is, just advice, and to check it our first hand.

Opinions are like arseholes, everyone's got one. This forum is a wonderful source of information, but it is still your personal responsibility to exercise due diligence where the risks dictate to.

I agree. I'm not disputing the fact that it is up to the individual to check the regulations instead of taking second hand information, but too often they don't. I find it unacceptable for sloppiness on both parts. If I am to provide information, I would want to make sure it is correct. The CPR bridge and the river mouth maybe close, but it's not the same. I'm not so concerned about forum members become liable that someone else breaks the law due to their advices, but rather I want to ensure those who use this resource end up going fishing as informed as possible.

In addition, new users in the fisheries are not necessarily familiar with how regulations work or even know if they exist. This is why whenever I answer, links to the regulations are included so my interpretation of the regulations and the actual publicized regulations are both available to those who ask.

Sloppy information, poor sentence construction and spellings that we keep seeing lately are what I consider as pure ignorance and lack of respect among the new generation from poor teaching. Or maybe my standard is just a bit high.

[clarki]

thankyou clarki

I really wasn't defending you. You have been guilty of posting claims that may not be true. While everyone's opinion is valid, when you are young and/or inexperienced, it's better to listen at least three times as much as you talk

Besides Rod wasn't hassling you. In your teen years like you are, you would do well by heeding Rod's counsel and some day you might also be a reputable source of information and catch as many fish as he does. (besides he owns the website!)

[steve B]

from now on i will check the government site first before asking it was my mistake and laziness on my part sorry if i created a hassle

[fly fisher]

I agree. I'm not disputing the fact that it is up to the individual to check the regulations instead of taking second hand information, but too often they don't. I find it unacceptable for sloppiness on both parts. If I am to provide information, I would want to make sure it is correct. The CPR bridge and the river mouth maybe close, but it's not the same. I'm not so concerned about forum members become liable that someone else breaks the law due to their advices, but rather I want to ensure those who use this resource end up going fishing as informed as possible.

In addition, new users in the fisheries are not necessarily familiar with how regulations work or even know if they exist. This is why whenever I answer, links to the regulations are included so my interpretation of the regulations and the actual publicized regulations are both available to those who ask.

Sloppy information, poor sentence construction and spellings that we keep seeing lately are what I consider as pure ignorance and lack of respect among the new generation from poor teaching. Or maybe my standard is just a bit high.

new rto stave i am not rod i have been fishing their since i was nine i just never fished it this time of year.

[steve B]

Go Canucks Go

[clarki]

I agree. I'm not disputing the fact that it is up to the individual to check the regulations instead of taking second hand information, but too often they don't. I find it unacceptable for sloppiness on both parts. If I am to provide information, I would want to make sure it is correct. The CPR bridge and the river mouth maybe close, but it's not the same. I'm not so concerned about forum members become liable that someone else breaks the law due to their advices, but rather I want to ensure those who use this resource end up going fishing as informed as possible.

In addition, new users in the fisheries are not necessarily familiar with how regulations work or even know if they exist. This is why whenever I answer, links to the regulations are included so my interpretation of the regulations and the actual publicized regulations are both available to those who ask.

Sloppy information, poor sentence construction and spellings that we keep seeing lately are what I consider as pure ignorance and lack of respect among the new generation from poor teaching. Or maybe my standard is just a bit high.

We're on the same page. You do encourage responsibility and provide the resources for folks to be self reliant and find the answers for themselves.

Honestly, I think your standards may be too high; it is not always pure ignorance and lack of respect. My son has a learning disabilty (written output disorder) and is challenged with spelling. A bright articulate kid, and a voracious reader, but can't spell his way out of wet paper bag. However when he texts or Facebooks he doesn't use caps or grammar and admits it's because he doesn't want to take the time. With forum member's posts, both could be a factor, however I do know that my son's experience has taught me to be a bit more tolerant of poor grammar/spelling/punctuation.

Now back to cutts on the Stave...

[Rodney]

new rto stave i am not rod i have been fishing their since i was nine i just never fished it this time of year.

If you've read my post carefully, you would understand that I was not suggesting you are new to the Stave and actually make an effort to construct a sentence that is readable.

[Rodney]

We're on the same page. You do encourage responsibility and provide the resources for folks to be self reliant and find the answers for themselves.

Honestly, I think your standards may be too high; it is not always pure ignorance and lack of respect. My son has a learning disabilty (written output disorder) and is challenged with spelling. A bright articulate kid, and a voracious reader, but can't spell his way out of wet paper bag. However when he texts or Facebooks he doesn't use caps or grammar and admits it's because he doesn't want to take the time. With forum member's posts, both could be a factor, however I do know that my son's experience has taught me to be a bit more tolerant of poor grammar/spelling/punctuation.

I overgeneralized a bit in the last post of course and probably should have been worded better as there are indeed individuals with learning disabilities. What I wish to see from young members is more effort, which is really lacking in the new texting era.

I guess Nina can take my too high standard as a compliment.

from now on i will check the government site first before asking it was my mistake and laziness on my part sorry if i created a hassle

Don't be discouraged to post questions of course. This discussion is not to suggest that you were too lazy to check the regulations directly. Experienced anglers on the forum should understand that there are always new comers into this recreation and many will need guidance so if questions on regulations emerge, we should answer without judging the ones who are asking.

Back to your earlier question, there are no summer-run steelhead in the Stave River right now. The winter steelhead fishery is anytime from now until early spring. The cutthroat trout fishing can be quite good in late March/early April. In the summer months, while no salmonid species are present, there are northern pikeminnow and other small minnow species in the area.

[fly fisher]

everyone lets stop bickering and do what clarki said. i started this thread to get some info on the cutties not to start all this crap. i am sorry rod i just wanted some info on cutties at stave not anything about sea lions or the other crap everyone is fighting about. so please info on the cutties. i guess i will just ignore this thread if it keeps going like this.