Penalties for Flagrant Violations

[Stever]

I was wondering if any Twin City anglers caught the back page of the Star/Tribune sports section today (Outdoor section). Others can see the article here:

www.startribune.com/viewers/qview/cgi/qview.cgi?slug=doug10&template=outdoors_a

The pictures in the strib were unbelievable (I didn't see any on the website). I hope the bill that is mentioned in the article passes to help crack down on these thieves.

Best Regards,

Stever

[AquaMan]

Good man.

"Cracking Down On Game Hogs"

I was just about to post something on here regarding the new Bill in the House that will punish wildlife violators more dramatically. $30 for a walleye and $10 for every inch over 22. That could add up in a hurry.

I was stunned to see that one does not currently loose their license under most violations. The picture in the paper showed 48 walleyes between 3 guys that, in MN, are only allowed 18 (6 each) is purely flagrant. But, under current laws, they get fined and can hit the water the next day unless this is their second violation in 3 years.

One group of 9 guys had 2600 Perch from Winnie and another couple had 550 Crappies. The question they all asked after paying the $1300+ each in fines was.....get ready. "Can we fish tomorrow?" And they can. Gotta love this liberal State.

Another group of three guys was busted in Northern MN with 360 Crappies. Whoa! That is a mess of fish.

If I ever saw anyone in the process of or in possession of that kind of violation, I think I would run 'em over and claim temporary insanity. Heck, I'd be out in 1 month. Seriously, those are not sportsman, but fishing criminals. No better then thieves. and they should not get to fish again if the violation is this bad.

Good day!


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

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

[Tommy Mac]

Right on AquaMan! The laws in Minnesota for game violators are way to leanient. I want to see these new proposals become law. Imagine how many DON'T get caught. Certanly fear of punishment is not currently a deterant. It would be nice to see all those who read this post support stronger penalties with a response.
Tom

[EyeBoy]

AM;
Before ya run em over be sure to chain er. up, so ya don't get stuck.JK ;-)
Get a plate number etc. then get on the ol cell phone. Them fish cops need something to do.
ON-PLANE!!!TOM

[cisco]

Hey Aqua Man, don't label this type of "punishment" the fault of "liberals." We're talking about the abuse of a privilege -- one for which we obtain a license to participate in. It has nothing to do with liberal-conservative, but simply a matter of failing to observe the rules. My recommendation would be to deny them fishing/hunting privileges for years and years, or even life for the really flagrant violators. And, we need then to follow up with appropriate punishment of those violators who then continue to fish/hunt after license revocation.

We have the "right" to fish and hunt so long as we observe the rules governing that privilege.

[Mayfly]

I've seen a few hotshots here in Wisconsin get busted and lose their priveliges for a year. Wanna see a grown man cry? It humbles the toughest wiseguy, bigtime! A few years ago Wisconsin laid down the gauntlet on deer poaching. You step out of line, it's $1950 for starters. Go home and explain that one to the sex cop that cooks your meals and washes your stinky underwear. The deer hunters are extremely careful.

[BD]

Also in Wiscowsin, besides the high $ fines, flagrant violators can lose their boat, motor, trailer, the vehicle used to pull the rig, and all of the gear they have with them. Ditto for snowmobiles, shantys, deer rifles etc. Wardens can consfiscate the lot. If the judge says so the violators get them back but they shouldn't count on it. Every year the DNR holds auctions to dispose of the stuff.

[Stan]

In Michigan we also have the confiscation of boat/motor/trailer/vehicle/and all equipment with a serious violation (poaching). Its a great deterrent.
Someone mentioned loss of liscense for a year. A good move, but I'm not sure these types of indivuals would be deterred by that either!
I'm also amazed that many anglers really do not understand that "posession" also refers to the contents of your freezer at home.

[NOT MANY SEEM TO CARE]

it's a shame that not many of those visiting this site care about efforts to curtail game violators it doesn't say much for those who visit here seems they have more passion for bashing people with bad punctuation and who cna't spel

[mossbos]

I also think you must incorporate some kind of substantial fine or confiscate something with the loss of priviledges. Just the losing of your license for a year won't do it. Look at how many unlicensed drivers are out there.

[Backwater Eddy]

Rep. Bill Haas........

"It makes my blood boil," Haas said in St. Cloud last week at the DNR's annual Fishing Roundtable. "If you go to the grocery store and take something, that's stealing. This is the same thing. They're stealing from everyone in the state."

Chapin knows such violators are a minority, but he's concerned by the randomness of the gross violations he encounters. "You wonder how much is really going on out there," he said.

With Chapin's help, Haas and the DNR have drawn up a bill, introduced in the Legislature this week, that would greatly increase the penalties for gross violations of game and fish laws. Under the proposal:


Conservation officers could immediately seize hunting and fishing licenses, preventing violators from taking even more fish or game. And violators would not be able to obtain duplicate licenses.


Those convicted under the tightened guidelines could lose their hunting or fishing privileges -- or both -- for three to 10 years, which officials hope will be a major deterrent.


Officers would have more instances in which they would be required to seize equipment -- including vehicles, boats, trailers and even motor homes -- used to illegally take fish and game.

"We're trying to target the really serious gross violators, not the guy who catches 16 crappies instead of 15," said Maj. Chuck Schwartz of the DNR's Enforcement Division.

The loss of hunting or fishing privileges has been shown to be a bigger deterrent than fines or restitution.

One couple Chapin cited paid a $1,600 fine for having 45 walleyes. "It didn't bother them at all. What bothered them was whether they would lose their fishing rights," Chapin said.

[Frank from TBay]

In Ontario if the deed is very flagrant or you are a repeat offender the fines are huge and you will lose your fishing rights. You can also do time as one fellow did when he went fishing the day after he lost his fishing rights. The judge was pi**** off. Equipment is routinely confiscated and auctioned off. The fines and penalties have gotten a lot larger in recent years. The government wants to make an example of each conviction. I agree with fines, confiscation, mandantory loss of license and jail time if serious enough.
Frank

[bob oh]

Wonder why Ontario isn't tougher on its commercial fishermen. They routinely receive puny fines when they are caught cheating on Lake Erie, but then Ontario will turn around and "stick it" to a sportsfisherman......seems like it should be consistent - stick it to both of them! Sports violations "usually" involve a few fish; commercial violations usually involve a few "thousand" fish. But then, the commercial guys have more money and political clout??

Bob

[Beetle]

HEY, BY GOSH, How dare u acuse me of snot karring!!
Accually, you're all correct. You have to have judges sympathetic to game laws and willing to fine to the max. Stiff penalties and mandatory conviscation of equipment also. In other words, make it not worth the trouble to go outside the laws. Hope I spelled this write. Herb

[Stever]

It sounds like by some of the responses, that surrounding states/countries have more severe penalties for this type of activity. Can anyone help me understand why this wasn't brought up in Minnesota before? I mean, if this is happening on a random search by DNR officials, then you have to wonder how often it really happens.

When I am on the water, I tend to focus on my own fishing and try to block other activity out, but if I ever see this activity (not to sound like a preacher on his soap box), you can be sure I will be writing down boat licenses, etc. I mean I don't think any one of us could catch the guy/gal with 1-2 fish over their limit, but the abuse has got to stop.

Best Regards,

Stever

[AquaMan]

Hmmm. Not posturing here, but, this Bill has been on the floor several times and was stuffed with unacceptable issues by our "liberal" bretheren. Watch this one closely and see who adds what, then tell me what liberal politics have to do with it's success or failure.

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

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

[Frank from TBay]

I agree, some of the fines I've seen do not fit the crime for the commercial guys. I hope the laws change and judges get tougher on them.
Frank