steelhead quota
1 - 20 of 23 Posts
Joined
·
1,367 Posts
lol, nothing like a trick question to inform the public.
Joined
·
3,796 Posts
No, the answer is 2 daily, 10 yearly. It isn't dependent on where you are fishing. You may not retain more than 2 (hatchery) steelhead daily. If you are fishing on the Vedder and catch and keep your hatchery steelhead at 9 AM, you may leave the Vedder and head over to the Chehalis and catch and keep another hatchery steelhead. You cannot then fish the swquamish later tha day for yet more steelhead.Britguy said:
Joined
·
1,367 Posts
But there are also systems where you may not retain steelhead, period.professori said:
So basically if someone wanted too they could go catch 2 steelhead from the vedder and write down one from the vedder and one from the chehalis and have no problems? I find it kind of a dumb regulation, either way If I saw a guy on the Ved with 2 steelhead retained I would assume they were both caught on on that same river. 
But thanks for clearing this subject up.
But thanks for clearing this subject up.
Joined
·
3,796 Posts
I would think if you caught a hatch on the Chehalis, you would put it in the cooler in your truck and then proceed to the vedder. You would likely leave the fish in your vehicle (not carry it out to the river with you) and proceed to the water to fish. If you actually carried your Chehalis fish down to the water and were spotted with 2 fish, you probably deserve whatever hassles you are in for from whoever wants to hassle you :happy: :happy:.BigFisher said:So basically if someone wanted too they could go catch 2 steelhead from the vedder and write down one from the vedder and one from the chehalis and have no problems? I find it kind of a dumb regulation, either way If I saw a guy on the Ved with 2 steelhead retained I would assume they were both caught on on that same river.
eace: I guess the point is however you wish to do it, the regs allow you to keep 2 hatch steelhead per day, as long as all other regulations are followed.you can not be on the Chehalis with a dead steelhead from the Vedder and continue to fish even though the dead one you have is from the vedder without being able to prove where you caught it. Just writing it down on your license that it is from another river is not proof enough. Maybe if you had a photo from the day showing you wieghed it in at a local place on the vedder (fred's, on the way, etc) would work but it would be up to you to prove to the CO which river you caught the fish on.BigFisher said:So basically if someone wanted too they could go catch 2 steelhead from the vedder and write down one from the vedder and one from the chehalis and have no problems? I find it kind of a dumb regulation, either way If I saw a guy on the Ved with 2 steelhead retained I would assume they were both caught on on that same river.
Joined
·
1,165 Posts
Actually it is up to the CO to prove that you did not catch both on the same river. They can not just assume that you caught both on that river. If they did assume that and you took it to court the judge would have to throw it out as there is reasonable doubt.rln said:you can not be on the Chehalis with a dead steelhead from the Vedder and continue to fish even though the dead one you have is from the vedder without being able to prove where you caught it. Just writing it down on your license that it is from another river is not proof enough. Maybe if you had a photo from the day showing you wieghed it in at a local place on the vedder (fred's, on the way, etc) would work but it would be up to you to prove to the CO which river you caught the fish on.BigFisher said:So basically if someone wanted too they could go catch 2 steelhead from the vedder and write down one from the vedder and one from the chehalis and have no problems? I find it kind of a dumb regulation, either way If I saw a guy on the Ved with 2 steelhead retained I would assume they were both caught on on that same river.
Joined
·
124 Posts
[/quote]
Actually it is up to the CO to prove that you did not catch both on the same river. They can not just assume that you caught both on that river. If they did assume that and you took it to court the judge would have to throw it out as there is reasonable doubt.
[/quote]
They are just like cops, they can assume anything they want.
You then have to prove you didnt do it in court.
Actually it is up to the CO to prove that you did not catch both on the same river. They can not just assume that you caught both on that river. If they did assume that and you took it to court the judge would have to throw it out as there is reasonable doubt.
[/quote]
They are just like cops, they can assume anything they want.
You then have to prove you didnt do it in court.
Joined
·
3,796 Posts
Actually it is up to the CO to prove that you did not catch both on the same river. They can not just assume that you caught both on that river. If they did assume that and you took it to court the judge would have to throw it out as there is reasonable doubt.
[/quote]
They are just like cops, they can assume anything they want.
You then have to prove you didnt do it in court.
[/quote]
That is true if you live in France. In Canada the onus is on the Crown (police, prosecution, etc) to prove a crime has been committed by the accused. You are not under any obligation to prove anything. The reason many activities by real criminals don't get to court, even after an arrest has been made, is because after examination of the facts, the prosecution believes there is not enough evidence to prove the crime was committed buy the accused.
[/quote]
They are just like cops, they can assume anything they want.
You then have to prove you didnt do it in court.
[/quote]
That is true if you live in France. In Canada the onus is on the Crown (police, prosecution, etc) to prove a crime has been committed by the accused. You are not under any obligation to prove anything. The reason many activities by real criminals don't get to court, even after an arrest has been made, is because after examination of the facts, the prosecution believes there is not enough evidence to prove the crime was committed buy the accused.
what you say may be true Prof, but i have watched MoE charge a guy with using a barbed hook even though the rod was in a boat not being used at all and was one of 6 or 7 rods in the boat and there was no fishing going on at the time. It was then up to the individual to follow through and go to court to prove his point. Out there in the real world you are guilty until proven otherwise from past experience. So your choice then becomes paying a $75.00 ticket or taking 2 days off of work with out pay to prove you are innocence. Seen it all happen here in BC.
Joined
·
898 Posts
Well that got everyone thinking and reading the regs :thumbup:
The reason for my comment
If someone just says "you can keep two hatch steelhead in region 2" some might think that they can keep two on any river in region 2
Also they must be over 50 cm 8)
The reason for my comment
was to ensure everyone reads the regs for each water shed
If someone just says "you can keep two hatch steelhead in region 2" some might think that they can keep two on any river in region 2
Also they must be over 50 cm 8)
There is a big difference between being charged with a crime and being convicted of one. People do make a judgement call on the value of the time it takes to show up in court versus the $ it costs to simply pay the fine but when it comes down to it (in criminal court), the MoE has to prove beyond the shadow of a doubt that the guy was fishing with a barbed hook.rln said:
Does the MoE even show up to court for $75 fine disputes?
Joined
·
99 Posts
Theres nothing wrong with the regulation. Like alot of our regs its all about honesty. If all fisherman weren't trying to expose loopholes all the time we wouldn't have many problems!
Joined
·
243 Posts
Fine, I'll do it. Just remind me in the winter and I'll go bonk one somewhere and then go to the Vedder and bonk another one and drive around looking for a CO. Then it will be settled once and for all.
1 - 20 of 23 Posts
