"Mutilation of game fish"

[WAeyes]

Curious what the laws are in other states when transporting filleted fish? A few years ago I was stopped in a game check (on a freeway) and searched for fish and/or game. I thought I was completely legal with some walleye fillets on board, so I showed him. He looked in my cooler quickly and without counting or measuring the fillets, he told me it was illegal to possess gamefish outside of your immediate residence that has a length restriction imposed. He showed me how it very vaguely stated this in the rule book and I sincerely apologized and he let me go with my fish. 3 weeks later I get a ticket in the mail for mutilation of gamefish. If you cant legally fillet your fish until you get home, how could you ever enjoy fish over the campfire? Now I have to gut the fish and leave the head, tail, and skin intact. Makes for one messy cooler by the time you get home. Any thoughts or comparisons on this issue in other states would be much appreciated. This hassle makes me think twice about keeping a couple fish for table fare.

[henckel]

I'm sure the transport rules on fish are different depending on where you live. Here in Montana, you can fillet walleyes but have to keep at least a one-square inch patch of shoulder skin naturally attached to the fillet. Of course, we've got no size restrictions on walleyes -- yet. -- mark

[Hans]

In Minnesota you must leave a patch of skin and scales (I think minimum 1 square inch) on each fillet. Two fillets counts as one fish, so don't cut your fillets down to serving size till you get home.

You cannot possess fillets on the water.

Hans

[Matt]

Out of curiosity, what state were you in and what was the fine?

[WAeyes]

Washington State and the fine was $150.00, strange thing was I didn't know I was getting a ticket until it came in the mail. I guess he didn't have the nerve to tell me in person.

[manitobawalleye]

in manitoba we have to leave 1 sq. inch of skin to identify species, but in areas with length limits i always just gut and ice the fish. the onus is on you to prove your fish are a certain length and this is the only way.... same for lake of the woods, ontario...........

[dutchman]

WAeyes, In S.D. they require that they are able to count the fillets, 2 fillets equal 1 fish, they also require that there is a 1 sq in patch of hide left to identify the specie. I to had a unfortunate experience in learning the law, I fillet my fish and left the piece of hide just as the law requiered but I kept the remains of the fish in a cooler on ice until I could dispose of them later, (it was a very hot day, there was no cleaning facility where I put my boat in so I kept them rather than throw them around and stink the boat ramp up) Just my luck I ran into a game check on my way home, I was not that concerned as I didn't even have a limit of fish. The GFP official looked at the fillets in one cooler and asked what was in the other cooler, I told hime the guts and stuff, he asked to see them and although I thought it was odd I retreived the bag of guts. He then proceded to count the remains of the fish that I had cleaned and and added them to the fillet count, This put me over the legal daily limit, I was sited for to many walleyes in my possesion. Feeling a little stunned I agreed and accepted the citation and had to pay the fine. So the moral of the story is if you come apon a smelly remote boat ramp chances are I may have been there.

[cisco]

It has always struck me as peculiar that in fish and game matters the suspect is guilty until he or she proves him/herself innocent. Even search procedures are more intrusive -- I once had a game warden search in my trunk, under the hood, inside brown-bag lunches inside the vehicle, under seats, and even had me remove all four wheel covers to see if I had concealed birds in there. Same with fishing. The search can be as intrusive as the warden deems "necessary." We know some people poach and cheat -- nonetheless, I for one would like to see a probable cause standard upheld for all citizens.

[Bronco]

Dutchman,

Your story shows why so many people are losing respect for the state game and fish departments. Instead of a fine you should have been congradulated for being a good sportsman. It makes me sick when power hungry people like that are hired by conservation agencies and allowed to do their thing. Anyone could tell that the fish garbage and the fillets were less than a limit if they could count. If the law lets this type of interpetation to go on, then the law needs to be changed and people like your conservation officer need to be educated or fired from his job. He needs to learn about public relations and that actions like his affect more than just one person. Now many people on this thread know what was done and will have a reaction to it, and my guess is that it will be more negative than positive. I still say you did the right thing.

Good fishing
Bronco

[MI fish]

I'd have gotten an attorney and and seen his ##### in court. Why do people let the goverment jackboots walk all over you??

[eyewinder]

Let's face it, time is often money. Too often it's less bothersome (and even cheaper) to pay the fine than to make a court appearance.
I once wrote a note of explanation to the court when mailing a ticket (and a check for the fine) for a violation that I was not guilty of.
The jurisdiction was a three-hour drive (one-way) from where I live.
In that situation, the court accepted my explanation and charged me $20 court costs, but refunded the amount that I had paid for the fine.
Sometimes we are pleasantly surprised. . .

[Mac]

If that is the whole story, then putting fish carcusses in trash would be classified as wanton waste.

[Gomez]

Funny thing, is that WE, the sportspeople, who do these activitys,and PAY $$$$ all the fees, and the even the wadges of the Jack Booted Thugs , who are sworn to uphold the Law, just go and take that peice of paper, and disregaurd it, what paper is that ??? the CONSTITUTION and the BILL of RIGHTS and ALL of the AMENMENTS, these do apply to dnr and irs, seems they have verry short memmorys, here in the great state of MICHIGAN, they have Squandered our Whithetail heard, for SALES of licenes, in quest of the big BUCK $$$, and it's all on computer now, enormus amounts of money, and they cry not enough, raise the fee's, non accountablity and MISSMANAGMENT, and then rude and UNACCEPTABLE treatment, guilty untill proven more guilty, now this is only at the state level,what are the FED'S doing??? maybe another WACCO,Rubby Ridge, EYE LOVE MY COUNTRY, BUT BY GOD, EYE FEAR MY goverment, Fish today, for tomorrow it might not be leagle to do so.

[FrankfromPa]

WAeyes,here in Pa species with minimum size limits may not be filleted until arrival of consumption.Fish without minimum size limits may be filleted,but the skin must remain intact until arrival of consumption.Dutchman,there is no way I would have just payed the fine.It is a shame that the fine came two weeks later or you could have taken both stinking old bags of fish and thown them on a court room table and said lets do a count.You are now on record for illegally posessing over your creel.I would have fought this as far as I could take it.I guess it is a priciple thing for me.Get em in the net,Frank

[Gray Ghost]

Game wardens are required to live by the constitution, just like any law enforcement officer. That means they can't search your home without a warrant, and their ability to search anywhere else where you have an "expectation of privacy" (for example, to search your vehicle, your person or maybe even your boat) is restricted by law. Although I'm not a constitutional lawyer, my memory of my Con Law class is that basically they need "probable cause" (or your permission) to search you or your vehicle. So, in the U.S., a random stop of your vehicle does not give the warden the right to search. On the other hand, if the warden observed you taking over your bag limit, that would probably constitute probable cause for a search of your vehicle or boat.

So, if you object to being searched, don't give permission, and if the warden insists, ask him what is his "probable cause" to do the search. And if he insists on doing the search anyway, without probable cause, stand up for all of our rights and fight that ticket in court!

I stand open to correction on the finer points of Constitutional law, if anyone else cares to correct me.

Canada has different laws, of course.

GG

[Gray Ghost]

Game wardens are required to live by the constitution, just like any law enforcement officer. That means they can't search your home without a warrant, and their ability to search anywhere else where you have an "expectation of privacy" (for example, to search your vehicle, your person or maybe even your boat) is restricted by law. Although I'm not a constitutional lawyer, my memory of my Con Law class is that basically they need "probable cause" (or your permission) to search you or your vehicle. So, in the U.S., a random stop of your vehicle does not give the warden the right to search. On the other hand, if the warden observed you taking over your bag limit, that would probably constitute probable cause for a search of your vehicle or boat.

So, if you object to being searched, don't give permission, and if the warden insists, ask him what is his "probable cause" to do the search. And if he insists on doing the search anyway, without probable cause, stand up for all of our rights and fight that ticket in court!

I stand open to correction on the finer points of Constitutional law, if anyone else cares to correct me.

Canada has different laws, of course.

GG

[Matt]

Still BS! Sounds like the officer writing the ticket should have paid the 20 bucks.

[AquaMan]

I think I would make a trip to court to get a clearer picture of this ticket and provide the judge with that story. He, too, might find that equally vague and dismis it.

Game fish mutilation is more appropriate for those that are using game fish for bait or wanton wasters. Not the guy that has neat fillets in the cooler.

AquaMan~~~~~~~~~~~~~

--- "It all begins and ends at the water's edge"

[AquaMan]

Negative, Grey Ghost. A Conservation Officer has only to suspect that a violatioin is present to search. No probable cause is required. In MN they can walk into your house while you are present or not and search you home. Realize, that this is the extreme and, to avoid serious scrutiny, it is not common. However, Lake of the Woods resorts were raided several years ago on suspision that they might have excess game. The homes of several guides and resort owners were also targeted. This was all done without warrants or search and seizure papers. Read your regulations and it will spell out the rights of the Officers. They have more power then the State Police when it comes to violations. They can take your boat, car and gear on the spot if they feel the violation is severe enough and was used in the offence.

AquaMan~~~~~~~~~~~~~

--- "It all begins and ends at the water's edge"

[eyewinder]

Matt:
I don't disagree with you. But, my point was that I sent the $60 ($40 fine $20 court costs) because it was less expensive to do that than to appear in court (350-mile round trip and a day away from work).
I would have rather had my day in court, but grandpa used to tell me that "ya gotta pick yer fights."

[Matt]

Yea, I know. This kind of crap just burns me up. Spend $100 to save $15...... But lately I've been feeling that stands need to be taken. Not just with this Warden subject but with that whole "they live hundreds of miles away, what are they gonna do about it" attitude. Seems like if enough people start making a stink and costing people some money their practices will have to get reviewed.