Snagging intentionally...

Ontario Fishing Forums

Help Support Ontario Fishing Forums:

AKnook said:
My buddies and I get a lot of flack because we report on a lot of trips we take. There are no big surprises. There are books written, articles, and the internet. It is sure no big surprise at any river if they are on the road system. I report because I like to share experiences. Because it may help someone out. Hell, I check reports as well. I get pumped at seeing photos and reading reports. We have countless books on all the road side streams here in Alaska. There are no big surprises. It irks me when I get flack for reporting on a popular river such as the Kenai. Really? The Kenai is huge, I am not stating where on the Kenai. I moved up here with no knowlegde of how to fish up here. The reports and forums here helped me out tremenously. If I can help someone out, like you said a father son team, all the better. I am on this forum to gain knowledge so I have some sort of idea where to go and what to do when I visit every year. You don't have to share specififc spots, but to give flack for someone reporting on a roadside stream/river is crazy.
Click to expand...

You make a good point here but the post in question was pretty bad. It stated that every Salmon in lake Ontario is in this river and to get down to the river now. It also mentioned specific parking spots. Jpct ive never had a problem with anything you posted before but this situation was pretty bad.
 
Can we just place "no snagging" signs on the trees that are nearby these pools one night? Screw them right into the tree and at least we have something to point to when we encounter this situation. Or how about calling MNR first thing in the morning when you hit up the river, you hope that at least they will drive down to have a look. We have to make these guys work because we're the ones seeing the destruction and we're all feeling pretty helpless about it. But it looks like it's time to take action.
 
NADO said:
You make a good point here but the post in question was pretty bad. It stated that every Salmon in lake Ontario is in this river and to get down to the river now. It also mentioned specific parking spots. Jpct ive never had a problem with anything you posted before but this situation was pretty bad.
Click to expand...

The parking lot was full.. lol.. what did that matter?

Petro park is the most well known fishing spot on Lake Ontario. Right next to Erindale.

My post had nothing to do with anything. So everyone take a chill pill and please take a step back from your horses.

The only intention my post had, was for the bunch of rookies/noobs on here posting every day that they have never caught a salmon before. So I told them where to go. I'm not apologizing for that. I did nothing wrong.

We live in 2012. It is the age of the internet. The only people who complain are those who are stuck in a time where they were the only ones on the river, and the only one to find out information was from a telegram.

Times have changed. Accept it. Get over it.

</rant>
 
going to create some shirts 'snaggers beware left dummied on the side of the river" or " declare war on the snagger"... should of seen my pops back in the day, talk about a river warrior, scissors out shaking his fist like a madman... many a snagger found him self climbing out of the river thanks to pops... ohh the good old days :razz:
 
People do bad things every day. The resources aren't there to deal with them all. If you want it dealt with... YOU gotta deal with it.

I'd rather take my lumps and know I dealt with it than take a picture.
 
Klamp said:
People do bad things every day. The resources aren't there to deal with them all. If you want it dealt with... YOU gotta deal with it.

I'd rather take my lumps and know I dealt with it than take a picture.
Click to expand...

But you gotta ask yourself. Is it really worth getting hurt over or getting an assault charge that will haunt you for the rest of your life? For a fish?
 
jpct said:
The parking lot was full.. lol.. what did that matter?

Petro park is the most well known fishing spot on Lake Ontario. Right next to Erindale.

My post had nothing to do with anything. So everyone take a chill pill and please take a step back from your horses.
Click to expand...
last I checked that thread had over 800 views! -How many active members are there on this board?..... -It was an irresponsible post.. <_<


jpct said:
The only intention my post had, was for the bunch of rookies/noobs on here posting every day that they have never caught a salmon before. So I told them where to go. I'm not apologizing for that. I did nothing wrong.

We live in 2012. It is the age of the internet. The only people who complain are those who are stuck in a time where they were the only ones on the river, and the only one to find out information was from a telegram.

Times have changed. Accept it. Get over it.

</rant>
Click to expand...
Nothing new.. all noobs will ask that immediately after signing up. So I am not sure what made this situation any different. *shrugs*
-Why did you not mention this during August when you were enjoying the early runs out east? Noobs were asking then.. ??? :idea:???

Karma
 
CJR said:
But you gotta ask yourself. Is it really worth getting hurt over or getting an assault charge that will haunt you for the rest of your life? For a fish?
Click to expand...

You DO have to ask yourself that, absolutely brother.

Some people are clearly upset about this kind of situation, to the point they post here asking for suggestions. If this is the kind of thing that upsets one, I guess one has decided if it's worth it or not.

Like I said, I've taken my lumps in life and will continue to do so.
 
Weather snaggers find out on a fourm or through word of mouth, they will find out no matter what. And no matter what there will be snaggers, this forum is designed to help other anglers. I believe jpct post was only intended to help the noobs. Atleast someone on here is willing to go the extra bit to help.
 
Klamp said:
You DO have to ask yourself that, absolutely brother.

Some people are clearly upset about this kind of situation, to the point they post here asking for suggestions. If this is the kind of thing that upsets one, I guess one has decided if it's worth it or not.

Like I said, I've taken my lumps in life and will continue to do so.
Click to expand...
Violence is never the solution... I have learned this over time..
 
RiverNinja said:
-Why did you not mention this during August when you were enjoying the early runs out east? Noobs were asking then.. ??? :idea:???

Karma
Click to expand...

he didn't mention it because they had the river all to them selfs LOL. Now that he had all the fun he runs hes mouth. <===== Internet hero :roll:
 
RiverNinja said:
My bad.. I based that on "taking your lumps and continuing to do so.."
Click to expand...

One has to prepare for taking a beating if they're gonna confront someone. Like CJR said, you gotta think about whether its worth it.

I'm fundamentally flawed in that I do no have the ability to ignore or otherwise walk away from a bad situation. It's just the way I'm wired I guess.
 
My question is, are Native Canadians legally allowed to intentionally snag, shoot with a bow, or harvest fish by any means, in any location and at any time? I am not meaning to create any controversy, or perhaps condone the intentional snagging of fish as I know as a Canadian citizen who has purchased an Ontario fishing license, that it is illegal and unethical to do so. I just ran into a couple guys who were using other methods than rod and reel fishing. I approached these individuals, in a non-confrontational way and talked to them for several minutes, and they appeared willing to talk. I think it would benefit anglers to know this information, so that they can make a more informed decision as to how and when they approach someone who is intentionally snagging.
 
[sup][font="Times New Roman][font="Times New Roman][size="2"]DEWY: Basically "EVERYONE" is to follow the MNR REGULATIONS.
However there are exceptions for our "Original Land Caretakers": (Treaties, Reserves, Food or Cerimonial)[/size][/font][/font][/sup]

[sup]* There are "REGULATIONS & GOVERNING BODIES", the "LAW" and then the "COURTS" .....
Some would also say there are "HIGHER SPIRITS"


Things can be confusing.



[font="Times New Roman][font="Times New Roman][/font][/font][/i][/size][i][font="Times New Roman"]http://www.attorneyg...h/pdf/Coyle.pdf[/font]

[/sup][font="Times New Roman][size="3"][font="Times New Roman][size="3"]Hunting and Fishing Rights Off-Reserve

[/font][/size][/font][font="Times New Roman][size="3"][font="Times New Roman] [/font][/size][/font][size="3"]Following the decision in[/size][font="Times New Roman][size="3"][font="Times New Roman][size="3"]Sparrow, [/size][/font][/size][/font][font="Times New Roman][size="3"][font="Times New Roman] [/font][/size][/font][size="3"]the Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) issued an Interim Enforcement Policy on Aboriginal hunting and fishing.[/size]277 The terms of this policy were finalized in 1991 after discussions between the MNR and First Nations representatives within the ICO

68

[sup]278 The Policy was amended in 1996, after a court decision against the province, to include Aboriginal people other than status Indians.

279

[font="Times New Roman][font="Times New Roman]Interim Enforcement Policy[/font][/font][/i][font="Times New Roman][font="Times New Roman][/font][/font], note 258 at ss.1 and 2. [/size]

[size="2"] 280

[font="Times New Roman][font="Times New Roman]Ibid[/font][/font][/i][font="Times New Roman][font="Times New Roman][/font][/font]., at s. 3 (a). [/size]

[size="2"] 281 See the preamble to the Policy and s. 6.

282 The

[font="Times New Roman][font="Times New Roman]Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act, 1997[/font][/font][/i][font="Times New Roman][font="Times New Roman][/font][/font], S.O. 1997, c. 41, amended in 2002, replaced the earlier [i][font="Times New Roman][font="Times New Roman]Game and Fish Act[/font][/font][/i][font="Times New Roman][font="Times New Roman][/font][/font]. [/size]

[size="2"] 283 See, for example,

[font="Times New Roman][font="Times New Roman]R. v. Marshall[/font][/font][/i][font="Times New Roman][font="Times New Roman][/font][/font], note 89 (decided in the context of a Maritime treaty[i][font="Times New Roman][font="Times New Roman])[/font][/font][/i][font="Times New Roman][font="Times New Roman][/font][/font]; [i][font="Times New Roman][font="Times New Roman]R. v. Jones [/font][/font][/i][font="Times New Roman][font="Times New Roman][/font][/font]14 O.R. (3d) 421 (Prov. Ct) [[i][font="Times New Roman][font="Times New Roman]Jones[/font][/font][/i][font="Times New Roman][font="Times New Roman][/font][/font]] (Aboriginal right of the Saugeen Ojjbway to fish commercially); an[i][font="Times New Roman][font="Times New Roman]d R. v. Jackson[/font][/font][/i][font="Times New Roman][font="Times New Roman][/font][/font], [1992] 4 C.N.L.R. 121 (Prov. Div.) [[i][font="Times New Roman][font="Times New Roman]Jackson[/font][/font][/i][font="Times New Roman][font="Times New Roman][/font][/font]] (fishing rights of the Kettle & Stony Point First Nation). [/size]

[size="2"] 284 In

[font="Times New Roman][font="Times New Roman]Jones[/font][/font][/i][font="Times New Roman][font="Times New Roman][/font][/font], ibid., Judge Fairgrieve concluded (at para. 74): [/size]

[size="2"]I am … satisfied that the evidence relating to the allocation of the quotas under the existing regulatory scheme has made no attempt to extend priority to the defendants’ band. Scrutiny of the government’s conservation plan discloses that anglers and non-native commercial fishermen have in fact been favoured, and that the allocation of quotas to the Chippewas of Nawash, much less the Saugeen Ojibway as a whole, did not reflect any recognition of their constitutional entitlement to priority over other competing user groups.

Judge Fairgrieve then continued at para. 84:

… It has also not been proved that there was appropriate consultation with the Saugeen Ojibway at the time the conservation measures were adopted. Instead, the evidence suggests inadequate efforts to enlist the

[/sup] process. The policy provides that Aboriginal

278 persons harvesting game or fish for personal consumption and/or social or ceremonial purposes in their treaty areas or traditional lands will generally not be prosecuted. Exceptions are provided for hunting in an unsafe manner, hunting or fishing in a way that puts conservation or habitat at risk, and hunting or fishing on private land without the consent of the owner.279 The policy also provides for the MNR Deputy Minister to screen all proposed MNR enforcement activities against Aboriginal people who appear to be harvesting game or fish for commercial purposes.280

By its terms, the Interim Enforcement Policy was clearly intended to be an interim measure for recognizing Aboriginal and treaty rights. The policy expressly provided for immediate negotiations with Aboriginal people across the province about the MNR’s enforcement procedures. It also committed the province to enact appropriate legislation regarding Aboriginal harvesting of wildlife and fish.

281 However, when the province enacted a new [font="Times New Roman][size="3"][font="Times New Roman][size="3"]Fish and Game Conservation Act[/size][/font][/size][/font][font="Times New Roman][size="3"][font="Times New Roman] [/font][/size][/font][size="3"],[/size]282 neither it nor the detailed regulations under it made any reference to treaty or Aboriginal harvesting rights. Nor does the legislation make any special arrangements to protect Aboriginal harvesting.

The current situation, then, is that Ontario’s fish and game laws do not generally recognize Aboriginal harvesting rights and the province’s enforcement guidelines guarantee protection only for harvesting for food and/or social or ceremonial purposes. The guidelines do not protect harvesting intended to provide a moderate subsistence to Aboriginal people, a right that has been recognized in various specific contexts by a series of court decisions beginning in the early 1990s.

283 Unfortunately for the relationship of the parties, it appears that since 1990 the province has frequently resorted to prosecutions of Aboriginal people rather than consultation in seeking to clarify the existence and extent of treaty rights. On at least three occasions since the Interim Enforcement Policy was adopted, Ontario courts have criticized the province’s limitation of Aboriginal harvesting opportunities and its reliance on prosecution in relation to Aboriginal constitutional rights.284

69

It should be noted that since the 1990s the MNR has implemented a number of specific initiatives in various parts of the province to allocate commercial fishing opportunities to First Nations. For example, following the court decision in

[font="Times New Roman][size="3"][font="Times New Roman][size="3"]R. v. Jones[/size][/font][/size][/font][font="Times New Roman][size="3"][font="Times New Roman] [/font][/size][/font][size="3"],[/size]285 MNR acquired 100 percent of the commercial fishing quota around the Bruce Peninsula and allocated it to the Saugeen First Nation. In addition, the MNR has allocated 50 percent of the commercial fishing quota in the north channel of Lake Huron to local First Nations. Finally, First Nations now have virtually all of the commercial fishing quotas on Northern Ontario lakes, including lakes Nipissing, Nipigon, and Lake of the Woods.286
 

Similar threads

B
Couple of questions about floating on a pin from a newbie
Replies
13
Views
3K
bigugly
B
B
Where to go for ice fishing - 3 or 4 day trip
Replies
10
Views
2K
Ibstacle
Ibstacle
F
My elusive nemesis” the pike”
Replies
4
Views
2K
FishingAddiction
F
C
Grand River
Replies
3
Views
4K
Cramien
C
B
Avoiding Snagging/Flossing
Replies
6
Views
3K
MuskieBait
MuskieBait

Latest posts

Back
Top