DNR had friend throw fish back due to no life jacket.

My friend who fishes 3-4 days a week on the river had a mechanical issue with his main boat. He brought his main boat into the dealer for repair and took his smaller duck boat out last week.

I want to preface this with the fact my friend is 100% at fault for not going over the boat and checking it for the correct safety items, (Life Jackets, anchor, fire extinguisher, etc. )

He was stopped by the DNR and it was discovered he didn’t have a life jacket. The DNR officer was not in the best mood and told him to get off the water. When the officer checked his live well and found 3 legal fish, he made my friend throw them back.
I agree with everything the officer did in this case, but can’t understand why he had to throw his fish back. Perhaps to teach my friend a lesson on how important having the proper items in your boat are..

….or another reason to bleed out your fish and toss into an ice filled cooler.

-J.

Without a life jacket in the boat he wasn’t legal. No different then not having a license. If he didn’t get a citation he is lucky it just cost him some fish.

He did get a citation as well. (As he should have)

The act of catching fish is not related to owning a life jacket. I don’t see the logic behind dumping the fish. Seems like a power trip.

Citing him for lack of preserver, sure. Forcing him off the water, sure.

Letter of the law -vs- spirit of the law. It doesn’t sounds like you friend is a habitual offender, or boating without a life jacket in dangerous waters. Sounds like a power trip to me.

You did not mention that he got a ticket, so I will assume he did not get one. In that case 3 eyes is a lot cheaper than a ticket…

Odd. What state?

Seems like a power trip.

Or more to the story…

I got a life jacket ticket in my canoe in 2′ water in college once.

Not even deep enough to get my nut sack wet.

DNR didn’t make me return my dead ducks

Thought the ticket was dumb considering zero risk but…tis the law.

Discarding his fish… That is quite odd.

Brian Klawitter wrote:

Odd. What state?

Minnesota, Happened near Prescott

Just wondering…

Is it possible your friend didn’t catch any fish in the first place and wanted to blame someone, in this case the CO for his bad luck?

Obviously I wasn’t there, but that would make more sense then the CO making him toss out a legal catch.

Brian Klawitter wrote:

Just wondering…

Is it possible your friend didn’t catch any fish in the first place and wanted to blame someone, in this case the CO for his bad luck?

Obviously I wasn’t there, but that would make more sense then the CO making him toss out a legal catch.

I do have several friends that I would suspect that exact scenario , but this guy is honest, never had a reason to doubt him.

I too thought it was odd that he had to toss out fish.

I suspect the CO was exceeding his authority. But then again it may be a law?
Either way makes sense to me.

Dutchboy wrote:

Without a life jacket in the boat he wasn’t legal. No different then not having a license. If he didn’t get a citation he is lucky it just cost him some fish.

Exactly what I was thinking. The fish were not taken legally.

I believe life jacket is in Boating regulations and not in fishing regulations….

In that case, he should have seized his boat…

gbfan10 wrote:

He did get a citation as well. (As he should have)

Since there’s a citation, we have the CO’s name and location. Let’s get him on the phone and ask why the fish were tossed.

Like BK mentioned, I’m betting there’s more to this story,,,,,,

HRG

Like drinking in the boat could get ya a ticket. Legally catching fish while drunk doesn’t mean you broke a fishing related law, and shouldn’t be able to keep the fish. Like having a boat registration not up to date… so you have to release the fish? None of it makes sense. Has to be more to it.

gbfan10 wrote:

He was stopped by the DNR and it was discovered he didn’t have a life jacket. The DNR officer was not in the best mood and told him to get off the water. When the officer checked his live well and found 3 legal fish, he made my friend throw them back.

… I have spent a ton of yrs. on the sippi river. I have NEVER Heard of Anyone that had to throw there fish Back.! All I have ever heard before was Instead of throwing them back the warden would take the fish. . . . Now Once the fish are in the live well they are in your possession, And it would be ILLEAGL to throw them back in the 1st place.?.? … rrr

Sounds like something a park ranger on the croix would do? I like CO’s and wish we had more but park rangers are D-bags..

Kyhl wrote:

The act of catching fish is not related to owning a life jacket. I don’t see the logic behind dumping the fish. Seems like a power trip.

Citing him for lack of preserver, sure. Forcing him off the water, sure.

Power trip for sure. There is no fishing reg or law that I have ever seen or heard or read that says you need a life jacket on or in your possession to catch a fish. Boating laws yes but not fishing. The CO should have been reported for being a Dip-hit IMHO

^^ Assuming a second hand story is accurate.

Gbfan, could you find out who wrote the ticket? I have a call into Joe already.

I’d certainly be interested in the rest of the story.

Put this in another situation. Suppose someone drove a car to buy a burger from a drive through restaurant. On the return home the driver was pulled over and it was found that the car did not have an operable horn. Horns are required on roads in this state as a safety device.

169.68 HORN, SIREN.

(a) Every motor vehicle when operated upon a highway must be equipped with a horn in good working order and capable of emitting sound audible under normal conditions from a distance of not less than 200 feet.

Should the person in this scenario be required to return the sandwich because of an inoperable horn?

No, because the horn has no bearing on the purchase of sandwich.

Likewise, the life jacket had no bearing on the act of catching fish. As pointed out, the life jacket is a requirement of the boating regulations not fishing. Unless something has changed.

Kyhl wrote:

I’d certainly be interested in the rest of the story.

Put this in another situation. Suppose someone drove a car to buy a burger from a drive through restaurant. On the return home the driver was pulled over and it was found that the car did not have an operable horn. Horns are required on roads in this state as a safety device.

169.68 HORN, SIREN.

(a) Every motor vehicle when operated upon a highway must be equipped with a horn in good working order and capable of emitting sound audible under normal conditions from a distance of not less than 200 feet.

Should the person in this scenario be required to return the sandwich because of an inoperable horn?

No, because the horn has no bearing on the purchase of sandwich.

Likewise, the life jacket had no bearing on the act of catching fish. As pointed out, the life jacket is a requirement of the boating regulations not fishing. Unless something has changed.

Well said!

Just finished talking with the DNR and here’s the rest of the story.

This fella did receive a citation for not having a PFD in his boat.
He was told to get off the water as he would be continuing to violate the law had he stayed on the water without a PFD.
He did have what the CO thought were legal size walleyes on a stringer.

But in the anglers frustration tossed them back on his own accord before the CO could mention that they likely wouldn’t live.

We didn’t talk about why the angler was frustrated. I can speculate but that wouldn’t be a fact.

GBfan, I didn’t call or post this to embarrass you. In fact if I had been told this story, I would have posted it myself.
Two things stood out in the original story. The first one was that it didn’t sound right. CO’s are people too and they do make mistakes. But I have to say with all the training they receive, it’s seldom considering.

The other was that this was a second hand story. It’s easy to misunderstand what was said. Hell, my FW tells me that she’s said many things that I don’t recall her saying!

Either way, we all know that it’s “open season” on CO’s all year. Hopefully the limits will continue to be reduced.

Way to go mr buzzkill.
I’m kidding of course.

Brian Klawitter wrote:

The other was that this was a second hand story. It’s easy to misunderstand what was said. Hell, my FW tells me that she’s said many things that I don’t recall her saying!

Either way, we all know that it’s “open season” on CO’s all year. Hopefully the limits will continue to be reduced.

Forums seem to naturally add to the evolution of a story. I’ve learned from IDO and BK especially, to consider the facts, and only the facts. Especially when it involves CO’s. There’s always 2 sides to a story and one is usually clouded by anger or frustration.

Thanks BK for checking into this, I didn’t think it sounded right either.

This guy said it happened a bit differently, but I of course wasn’t there. He told me the CO said to throw the fish back or he will take them and that’s when my friend said they probably won’t live anyways but tossed them back.

I just asked him if he stayed on the water after getting the citation, and he explained the CO was going to follow him to the boat launch but fell behind. While he was waiting for the CO to catch up he started fishing again. That part didn’t go over too well with the CO, (which I get)

I do know this guy wouldn’t keep an undersized or illegal fish.
Been fishing with him for years..

I am a fan of CO’s and I haven’t had a bad experience with one yet.

So the real moral to the story here is make sure to always have a PFD no matter which boat you’re in! Here’s something novel, try wearing it! Swamped boats, falling overboard…DROWNING are not typically “planned” events. You don’t think you need a PFD until you’re already in the water. The intent has always been to prevent this…

Attachments:

1. 

   Almost-gone_n.jpg
   

gbfan10 wrote:

I just asked him if he stayed on the water after getting the citation, and he explained the CO was going to follow him to the boat launch but fell behind. While he was waiting for the CO to catch up he started fishing again. That part didn’t go over too well with the CO, (which I get)

If this part of this tall tale is true, the CO should have arrested him on the spot and confiscated his boat.

What a tool.

HRG