It appears the town won’t be able to reel in any violators with its bait fishing bylaw and will have to cast for new ideas if it wants to curb the practice.
At the Feb. 3 meeting, CAO Bill White advised Minto council the town’s bylaw dealing with “the taking of bait fish” has been deemed “unenforceable.”
In 2004 Minto council passed a bylaw prohibiting the practice on town lands for “commercial purposes.”
“At the time there was concern about … licensed and perhaps unlicensed operator(s) who accessed local streams to remove bait fish. There were some reported confrontations with private landowners,” states the report from White.
Signs were put up warning of the restrictions and discouraging operators from accessing streams from town lands. The report notes there were some complaints from landowners about violations initially, but they have become less frequent.
The Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF) issues licenses to harvest bait fish through a process that involves an on-line application, a $297 fee, a two-hour training course and filing of Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point documents related to the spread of fish-borne diseases and invasive/unwanted species.
In September, then-Ward 1 Wellington County councillor Mark MacKenzie raised the issue of enforcement of the bait fishing bylaw. The Minto resident had been an opponent of bait fishing for many years and championed the town’s efforts to control it.
At that time, chief building official Terry Kuipers reported concerns with the enforceability of the bylaw and council decided to obtain a legal opinion.
At the Feb. 3 meeting, White said the towns’ solicitor determined that to prove a charge beyond a reasonable doubt staff must prove bait fish were taken from town lands and that the bait was sold as part of a commercial activity. The lawyers recommended repealing the current bylaw and replacing it with a new one that would be enforceable.
White said MNRF staff advise they have not received complaints about the only operator in Minto and the operator may have changed since the bylaw was passed in 2004.
Conservation officers enforce the provincial regulation and White said ministry officials stated if they were advised of a problem the officers would speak to the licensed operator and also enforce against illegal operators.
“With very few recent complaints, and licensing regulated by the province, staff recommends referring future calls directly to the ministry’s bait licensing officials who are in the best position to investigate problems,” White stated.
Repealing the bylaw would simply require removal of old signs, White said, while new bylaw legal costs and signage could “result in costs in the range of a few thousand dollars.”
Councillor Judy Dirksen suggested the town continue to fight the practice of taking bait fish out of local streams.
“If you take the little fish they never get to be big fish and if you don’t have any big fish you don’t have any fishing opportunities,” she said.
Mayor George Bridge suggested staff research other bylaws and “see if there’s anything that’s enforceable.”
“There are about three other municipalities that passed a bait fishing bylaw. Unfortunately, it’s identical to ours so we’re going to be writing it straight from scratch,” said Kuipers.
White stressed the town should focus on areas under its own control and not attempt to infringe on MNRF responsibilities involving licensing and catch quotas.
“Our bylaw was to regulate access to the stream,” he pointed out.
“Can we have a bylaw that stops them?” wondered Bridge. “It doesn’t sound like this bylaw worked.”
“Not the way it’s written,” agreed White. “But there’s probably another way of writing it and we could look into it and bring that back you if you still want us to pursue that.”
Bridge said, “Maybe we can put more teeth into it because I think the maximum fine is about 35 bucks – as if that’s going to deter anybody.”
Council passed a resolution directing staff to bring back further information on a potential new bylaw.
