93 Walleyes Over the Limit

Whos to say they even had a license? The DNR just said they will lose all privileges for the next three years, they never confirmed they even had a license. If that is the case, they will probably offend again.

I know that here in LAX, you can go to the Onalaska spillway and see offenders keeping anything and everything at any size. Families w/buckets full of panfish, short walleyes and bass, sheepies , etc..NO RESPECT or w/any regards to regulations. This happens Day in and Day out.

We have formal firearm training classes, advanced hunter and bowhunter training, ATV,snomobile and boat training. Why have we not implemented anything for fishing?? Just another thought.

You’d get the same response I got last night when I found a fawn in my back yard and called the DNR. “We are too short-staffed to send anyone out” blah blah….

The only way that would happen would be by volunteer work. Great Idea though.

I know Minnesota law allows for citizen arrest.

I agree

Quote:

---

What do I want?

Fines so stiff that the offenders pass out when the verdict is read.

Jail time. Made mandatory for gross violations.

Restitution. Not just for the number of fish taken but for the numbers of fish that would need to be stocked to replace those fish in the system, at that size.

Loss of any personal property used in conection with this / these violations.

Community service to include supervised interactions with peer groups designed to educate others in their peer group against breaking any game and fish laws in the future.

Loss of hunting & fishing privledges for a minimum of 10 years during which it would be illegal for them to own any hunting or fishing equipment.

There. That’s what I want.

---

I’ve been thinking about this one for the past few days.

Here is a basic fact of poachers:

They normally don’t have a license, when it is as flagerant as this. If they do, it is a minor concern to them, since the fine is relatively small in dollar amount (what? $50???). $50 fine when you have 100lbs of food (300+ panfish) in your freezer is pocket change.

One of the poachers that I know of, lost his license for 3 years. Not a problem for him. He just had his brother (who looks alot like him) buy all the licensea. Well, when the poacher did his fishing and hunting, he never took his wallet for ID. He just carried his license (actually, his brother’s license) and went under his brother’s name.

So, as far as removing privelages, there are ways around it. And, for “minor offenses”, if you get caught, the cost is pocket change.

So, that is the mentality of poachers, whether it is fur, fin, or feather…………

Why do I say this?
I come from an area that has alot of poachers. I know people who deer hunt in January, duck hunt in the spring, walleye fish on lakes in April. Have I turned some of these people in………Honestly, no. Why? I come from a small enough community, that if word got out, my dog would probably be poisened or I would be jumped in a bar with a beer bottle or 2×4. These poachers are not your run of the mill person who takes an extra duck or walleye. These guys are serious. It ain’t worth suffering the repercussions that “might” occur.

So, what is going to change them? My opinion is that it is going to take severe fines and jail time. One person I do know, did get reported for shoting a buck in zone 3 during the 2nd season, on his neighbors license. He hunted the 1st season in zone 3. What happened? He lost his rights to hunt and fish for 3 years. He also got hit up for a $3500 fine. But, since he had his brother get him all the license, he kept hunting and fishing the whole 3 years. What did the locals say when he got caught? Most of them laughed and blew it off. Nobody got real mad and made any effort to see him burn. Heck, they are all “neighbors” and “drinking buddies”.

If you look back in time………..poaching like this 20 years ago was VERY common. VERY COMMON. It also came from all walks of life. whether it was a few extra ducks, pheasants before 9am, or a buck shot after hours. It was very common to hear of someone taking 1 or 2 times their limit of fish. Heck, if someone got on them, they kept fishing that species until they were no longer in the area. Why? Because, if you really did get on those fish, it was luck, and people cashed in on them. They didn’t have all the gizmos and gadgets today to locate their target species.

Again, mentality was much different up to and through the 1980s. Catch and release, or preserving the resources was a “waste of time” or “not needed”, let alone unheared of, because if you didn’t cash in on them, the guy next to you would. I’m still trying to teach my dad about Catch and Release. He is 80 years old. He is a meat hunter. Why would he want to throw back a fish, that he wants to eat. Why go fishing, if you are not going to eat any fish. That is his mentality and was the mentality of 99% of the population of the 1980s angler.

Today, our focus on resources is much different.
We today, take care of our deer, ducks, pheasants, fish, etc.

Tons and tons of money is poured into this preservation “plan” by the common angler, all the way up to the million dollar boat manufactures.

So, my honest recommendation is this.
You people, who are the guides, bait store owners, rod manufactures, tackle companies, boat and motor manufactures, resort owners, etc, etc, etc need to lobby on this.

These people today that do poach, take away our fish. However YOU business people, that this resource is a way of life, need to protect it, to protect your income.

Lobbying is a way of life and there are power in numbers. People can complain all day long about this poaching stuff, but until you do something about it, to change the laws, nothing will happen.

I do know this.
20 years ago, poaching occurred and not much really happened.

Then, fishing became a market where people are making a lot of money through this business. To fish today, it cost some people thousands and thousands of dollars to have all the bells and whistles. It wasn’t like that 20 years ago.

So, my point is this. For those who are making a business of this, it is my recommendation that you headway the lobbying on this and make these laws strong enough to protect your business.

Fact is there is not enough government enforcement to protect all of our resources.
Fact also is that the fines are so insignificant, that it has little impact if these “evil doers” are caught.

Talk the talk? Try walking the walk?

I lobby with my job. I’m a broker and have bigger coorporations try to weed us guys out all the time. Those bigger corporations try to pass laws to give them advantages over federal guidelines that my job requires me to abide.

So, if you want to preserve your business, I would recommend that you start lobbying. There is alot of money out there, that can be raised to support a cause such as this.

But until these laws are changed, this will continue to happen.

Derek;
I commend you on taking the first step with this case. Think of the impact that you would have, if all your sponsers backed you on this. Think of the impact if your peers and their sponsers joined you in that court room??? Can you imagine the look on attorneys faces and the reaction to a judge if 100 guides, with signed petetions from their sponsers walked into that courtroom? Imagine the press coverage!!! Imagine if those 100 guides sent out a petetion to all their previous clients. A petetion to change these laws to make this harsh enough to reduce this type of action from occuring again. Hey, if St. Croix can charge $300 for a rod. Lowrance $2000 for a sonar/gps. Ranger $50,000 for a boat? I would think that they have the funds to support you guys on this.

Strength in numbers……….

Gary,

Very well put. That was the best post I have seen yet! Im on board!

Joe Hall

Quote:

---

Fines so stiff that the offenders pass out when the verdict is read.

---

Punitive fines, or value restitution? Sounds like punitive fines, which I would be OK with. I don’t know what the overlimit punishment is today as far as fines go, but certainly a progressive scale that does not give license to raid homes where a suspected teenager may have kept an extra bluegill from last Saturday’s outing make sense. Gross violations increase the penalty… Agreed.

Quote:

---

Jail time. Made mandatory for gross violations.

---

A little curious what purpose this serves. Is this punishment? Beyond the punitive fines already listed? I guess I don’t see how anything productive can be accomplished by locking them up other than incurred (distributed) cost of imprisonment. It was said somewhere that this was no different from stealing a TV. Does stealing a TV carry with it mandatory jail time in MN?

If it’s to teach them a lesson, then maybe there is some value; if it’s to “teach everyone a lesson” then it would be better to take out a 10 second ad on public television. Think about punishment for a person who is made to pay because someone else might commit a crime?

I’m not convinced that jail time serves as the public deterrent that people intend it to be. Can anyone, without using Google (or equiv) tell me what the sentences were for the last 5 child molesters in MN were? Anyone remember the names of even one of them? How many are registered in your hometown, listed specifically as “high probabilty to re-commit?” So long as we’re letting them out so that we can throw in more high-school kids that got caught smoking a joint in the name of declaring success in the war on People (err… Drugs, that is), I don’t think someone who took even this many walleyes poses that kind of risk should they be allowed to walk the streets (that is to say, I can tolerate bad fishing easier than I could my 9 year old getting raped on her way home from school, it’s just a matter of perspective for me, I guess).

Quote:

---

Restitution. Not just for the number of fish taken but for the numbers of fish that would need to be stocked to replace those fish in the system, at that size.

---

Agreed.

Quote:

---

Loss of any personal property used in conection with this / these violations.

---

Agreed, but limited to gross violations.

Quote:

---

Community service to include supervised interactions with peer groups designed to educate others in their peer group against breaking any game and fish laws in the future.

---

Excellent, Agreed.

Quote:

---

Loss of hunting & fishing privledges for a minimum of 10 years during which it would be illegal for them to own any hunting or fishing equipment.

---

Loss of privs for some amount of time is a good idea, the duration is a grey area and certainly everyone is going to have arguments for or against a certain stretch, but that discussion is endless and varied, and ultimately is going to hinge on one’s personal views. I think 10 sounds like a lot, but 3 doesn’t sound like much. The duration is of less importance than the act of revocation itself, on which we agree.

Ownership of fishing equipment is difficult to enforce, what if the guy has kids that genuinely enjoy fishing and have a rod in the garage, or a million other scenarios like that. It doesn’t make sense to raid his house constantly looking to see if there is a bobber hidden behind the couch. I don’t think it’s a bad idea, just impractical. Hunting equipment is so varied and (at least for me) such a part of everyday life that I don’t know how you would distinguish it.

It looks like we’re in near-total agreement, unless the jail time was a deal-breaker for you. I wouldn’t mind making them serve a week, or maybe even a month, were it the case that I thought there was extra room at the State Pen Inn.

The main reason I asked specifically about the felony, which was mentioned by several people, was to see if people would go so far as to deprive them of political and/or basic natural rights, which (as far as I know) does require a felony conviction.

Also: Thanks for an honest reply. I know that we are bound to have different perspective on this, particularly due to the impact of bungheads like this on your livelihood as a fishing guide. Your outrage is perfectly justifiable, and I don’t want others reading this thread to think we’re at odds or worse yet, that I’m defending these guys.

Why jail time? To send a message. That message is that this is a serious crime. Even if it for 1 day or 1 week. Make them explain to their friends, boss or even their kids why they got to spend some time behind bars and see if they’re still laughing about “getting caught with a couple over.”

If I steal a $500 locator, thats felony theft and I would probably get some jail time. Why not make stealing fish with a value of over $1000 also be a felony??

Good point about having to deal with employers and others. I hadn’t thought about that, but it would make a big difference. Like I said, a few days or a week sounds like justice, but people up-thread talking about a year or more seem out of touch.

I would also agree that if this were treated as a stolen property case, it would exceed the MN minimum for a felony charge. It cannot be so prosecuted, so it’s kind of a moot point. I just saw a handful of people specifically mention treatment of this violation as a felony and wondered where they were headed with it.

Can anyone tell me, are MN limits generated by the legislature, or are they set by the DNR??

Legislature with DNR input.

Out of touch? With what? Our desire? I think a day in jail is nothing more than a grown up “time out”. A day in jail doesn’t intimidate me in the least. Granted, it’d have to be for a good cause so it’s unlikely I’ll serve any time but I want a deterrant, not a slap on the wrist. It’s too easy to cover for a night or a weekend in jail. I say, go for a year….. we all know the lawyer will get you less depending on the severity of your violation. But gross negligence? Let’s give ’em 12 months to think about blissful ignorance and neglect.

By one very well written argument up thread, it would appear to me that the only way to keep them from repeating and committing the offense is to remove them from the ability at all. You can’t poach when your keester is stuck in a cell.

This is for gross violations. Put a definition on GROSS violation and let the severities stand. A fish or two over warranting such treatment? I pray to God I’m dead before anything gets that extreme.

Quote:

---

By one very well written argument up thread, it would appear to me that the only way to keep them from repeating and committing the offense is to remove them from the ability at all. You can’t poach when your keester is stuck in a cell.

---

Here is the same story from the Outdoor News

All I know is they didn’t catch those on Mille Lacs

Since emotions are running high, I was debating whether to toss out this bomb or not, but I’ll quote myself on it (and you can feel free to as well):

Quote:

---

The severity of this crime is in question as far as I’m concerned.

---

We’re talking about three guys that took an excessive (gross) amount of fish. Nobody was killed, maimed, injured, or even threatened. No personal property was lost (and yes, there is a difference). No victim will have to undergo years of counseling to overcome this.

Oddly James, who’s living is dependent on preventing abuses like this, has come back with a very level-headed opinion. As usual, he is to be applauded for thinking clearly in spite of what I imagine is blind rage (if I’m mad about it, there’s probably steam shooting out his ears, no?)

Everyone else has jumped on this bandwagon:

Quote:

---

i think that their decisions should be punished, and not worry about thier life that could be wrecked with jail time and or fines, or loss of fishing.

---

Shane isn’t saying anything different than the rest, he just put it down clearly. It’s not something I’m about to do, because in my mind, the punishment should be commeasurate with the crime. 93 fish, in my opion, does not warrant wrecking someone’s life.

As far as the deterrent effect of harsh sentences, it looks like my challenge was ignored, but we can always try it again: Without google or equivalent, what is the current Wisconsin minimum penalty for selling meth on school grounds?

I think I agree w/Gianni about not ruining somebody’s life over fish. As much as this bothers the heck out of me. I say a STIFF fine and loss of license for a few years would be sufficient for a 1st time GROSS offense. If they get caught again w/a GROSS offense, then talk a year jail time or whatever….

Welcome to MN, where you’re HMONG friends.

Let’s not go down the stereotyping road with this. The worst poaching offense I’m familiar with (over 400 walleyes) was committed by a white guy and a group of his buddies.

Gianni….. the emotions are in check but to me your argument only supports that there are many things wrong and/or out of balance within our judicial system. You’re challenge is to lead me to an apples and oranges discussion that I don’t want.

Let’s consider the “ruining” of a life. How many offenders are “ruined” by selling drugs, committing DWI’s, kidnapping, robbery… what have you. In my mind, those punishments aren’t harsh enough either. It all stems to much deeper issues than what laws exist to enforce proper conduct.

93 fish over represent how many meals for responsible anglers? 93 fish represent how many more successfully spawned offspring? 93 fish represent what percentage of a total ecological balance? We still don’t know where the fish came from…….. do we? Given the “just wrong” body of water, this could ruin good angling for countless others for sometime to come. Poor fishing takes it’s toll on small local business and tourism. Do we really know what has or hasn’t been ruined by the offense?

My concern is that it’s to easy to committ the crime, get away with the crime, and by the time you’re caught, I don’t think you’re just representing 93 fish! If punishment for a crime seems unthinkable, then let the crime BECOME unthinkable. A person with that many over the limit is not likely a “newbie” to the practice.

I’m just a guy who’s tired of “time” wishy-washing away accountability and responsibility. This flows over to all the other issues you’d like me to compare this to. Believe me, I want stiffer penalties in many areas. I miss the days of feeling it’s safe for my children to play in the front yard, even after dark. That’s how I had it.. and accountability and discipline were harshly and readily enforced. Things have gone soft in many respects and this turns into a whole new rant…… but the original question was asking what I’d want and I stated it. It’s what I’d want. That way, “THEY” can decide if the punishment fits the crime. If it’s not worth it, they more likely won’t do it.

As for the costs of putting up with offenders, understand that the easier it is to feel “it’s worth it”, the more offenders we’ll have. It’s going to cost me to let them off easy, likely just as much as it would be to sit their duff down on a metal bench for 12 months. More offenses, more court appearances, more costs to the recreational sportsperson……..

I appreciate all the knowledgeable resourcing you do Gianni. You do it very well. And maybe by the findings you’ve turned up make my opinion seem a bit ridiculous. That’s okay. But I’m a results guy. I look for what is or isn’t working and so far priviledges and money slaps aren’t stopping the serious offenders. My mind says it’s time to get out of “the box”. Either step it up or watch it’s current failure continue to cost us more money anyway. I’m more agreeable to investing costs into a successful deterrant than watching a continued rise in costs that aren’t brought by responsible citizens.

The emotions are in check buddy…… I just see it differntly.

I agree closely with James’ thoughts concerning firm retribution based on stocking and attrition to essentially replace what they have stolen, in this case.

With that said, I agree a bit with Stillakid because I would bet my lifetime fishing privileges that this was not the first time these folks had grossly broken the law… and I’m not even talking about the fish found in their freezer. I’m talking about a lifetime abuse of mother nature. Did you catch 100+ walleyes your first time out? *blinks*

I personally don’t care if these people knew or felt they were doing something wrong. It’s the personal responsibility of being an adult to know the rules. They are obviously skilled enough at fishing to have been around the block and must be held responsible. This was NOT an beginners mistake.

Throw every maximum penalty you can at them – – they are cleary guilty of gross negligence.

I completely understand where you are coming from Giani. I also completely agree with Kid. This is an emotional issue for us. We all love to fish, and it’s jerks like these guys that take away our resources. All I can say is, I hope the penalties are maximized under the current laws. Unfortunately, I don’t think it will stop these guys, language barrier or not.

They knew they were over the limit, pleading ignorance holds no water in my eyes. If you were to look at the fishing oppurtunities in their homeland, you will see it’s a social issue. Look how “fished out” so many of those countries are, no common sense. Like James mentioned above, this mentality doesn’t just belong to newcomers to our great land. It’s also rooted deep in our society, but we are gaining ground. Heck, I’m a convert, mainly due to this website!!!!! I wasn’t a 93 over my limit hog, but I used to eat every fish that came to the boat.

The main problem with what you’re talking about, Kid, is that the intangibles are just that: intangible/unquantifiable. Let’s just say that, for example, this happened on pool 4 (I don’t know where it really happend). Could James directly sue them for projected loss of income? If Steve shows a downturn in business over the next couple of years, could he go after them in civil court?

I think the answer in both cases is no, as it would be impossible to link any downturn in business direclty to this event. Oddly, whatever body of water this was on is likely to experience a brief increase in pressure due to the publicity of these guys, at least in the short run.

Thanks to everyone for a civilized discussion. Have a great holiday weekend.

Thank a Vet, buy him a beer if you get the chance, think of those who’ve given their lives for God and country, and pray for American servicemen and women overseas and at home.

Happy Memorial Day from the Wegers.

Derek, Thanks for this and I hope you can get close enough to growl at ’em if they won’t let you address them.

I don’t no if it would help accomplish anything, but if we started a petition against these poachers to try and get a maximum penelty enforced…….

maybe someone with high quality wording skills could go here and START AN ONLINE PETITION……then James could stick it to the top of all the forums so we could get as many signitures as possible. Where we would go from there, I haven’t the foggiest. But we need to take some sort of action……this would be one option

[Shane isn’t saying anything different than the rest, he just put it down clearly. It’s not something I’m about to do, because in my mind, the punishment should be commeasurate with the crime. 93 fish, in my opion, does not warrant wrecking someone’s life.

I agree with you on a few things, but the thing is, they have a hot line for us to turn in poachers, why would we take the time to turn them if there is nothing that is done to them. I mean i have seen people that have gotten jail time for poaching deer, why not fish? i think that if you poach a fish, or a deer or anything out of season or more than you are allowed to have in possesion. you should be treated all the same. all this will do is make me not want to turn anyone one in because they will get away with it anyway. i think that somewhere, there should be an example set and the rules set for this particular offense. i guess i will be most interested in what the penalties will be for these offenses. I am just angry because if they let everyone do this, take these numbers out of fisheries, guess what, my kids and grandkids won’t have much fish left to fish for.

thanks

shane

Ditto to James and Dee Zee’s statements, and I would like to see them show up at Adult Education seminars, and tell everyone what they did, and why they did it!
Tuck