The penalty was not severe enough. There should have been something done that would have forced them to return for the court date. Even though the tougher law will not go into effect until 2003 , I think the boat or a vehicle could have been held along with the fine money. Their priviledge to fish in Mn. should have been suspended for a long time also. Gee , think about their cost per pound…. Dino
I posted a comment, I’m not sure it will get published. I had to laugh at how naive the lady’s comment was too. Ya, it’s always those darn Iowan’s stealing our resources. It’s never the locals that go fishing everyday and take home their limit….. All we can do is help patrol each other, and eventually we’ll weed out all the slobs.
Waterfowler is right , if poachers know they are being watched by other anglers it may change their mind. Another common thing I run into is locals saying, ” I have to get out and fill my freezer”. More times than not they are aware of daily limits but not possession limits. Usually a friendly reminder is all that is needed.
I’m sure we all have our opinions about whether the fine was tough enough, but confiscation of property is an invitation to disaster. If Minnesotans desire stiffer penalties, make them stiffer. The article doesn’t make clear whether the $2200 is a penalty (fine) or is meant for restitution. Seems there is a significant difference.