Do you have to show a warden your live well?

If the live well is protected by rights of privacy and I think it is because it has a lid with hinges on it like a suitcase in your back seat, he shouldn’t ask to look, he should know that already and be informed of that by his sargent. In order to have freedom these rights must be maintained or like some have said given an inch and they’ll take a mile will hold true. There has to be a starting point for them too suspect a fishing law has been broken, if they haven’t seen you fishing and can’t prove befor they even get to the side of your boat that a person has been catching over thier limits, they shouldn’t even ask.

This is why sportsmen and people in general are complaining about having to open live wells and other things etc. they shouldn’t even be asked to do that without cause and proof period. I don’t know about you guys but i have things to do and places to go and I don’t like being stopped just because they think they should or can because someone else has broken the law, not me.

I have a lawyer that likes to fight things like this. Got any proof? befor they stop me is my thinking and alot of others too, because I haven’t got the time to make freedom drag along. If they’ve sat and watched someone take over thier limits then they have got proof and thats a completely diffrent book. Just because others may do it dosen’t mean i do, if they have suspicions, so what thiers alot of suspicious people but that still dosen’t mean I do it, go get proof or thier dragging freedom along.

Again, read this small little portion of the Supreme Court opinion:

Quote:
——————————————————————————–

Our decision in this case does not grant conservation officers power beyond that of other law enforcement officers. Rather, the difference between the inspection permitted under the facts of this case and searches impermissible under the Fourth Amendment is that fishing is a largely recreational privilege that anglers choose to engage in with knowledge of the regulations governing their conduct. Our decision merely acknowledges that an expectation of privacy in all parts of an open boat or other conveyance, admittedly used to transport fish, is not reasonable. Therefore, a limited inspection of certain parts of the open boat would not be prohibited under the Fourth Amendment. As such, under the facts of this case, it was permissible for the conservation officer to conduct a lawful nonconsensual inspection of the areas of Colosimo’s open boat typically used to store or transport fish. By refusing to submit to the officer’s lawful request to inspect these areas of his open boat, Colosimo violated Minn.Stat. § 97A.251, subd. 1(3).

Didn’t you read what the Supreame Court ruled…….

This is what I been trying to get across.
Once you buy a license you agree to follow the rules that govern the sport……so the live well isn’t protected by the 4th..

Well stated B. Curtis

Quote:

---

Basically I think what they are saying if fishing is not a right but a privilege…

---

So the all knowing Supreme Court decided it is ok to search my livewell (seems to spell out specifically the area used to store fish) because fishing is a privilege and not a right? How two sided is that? Try pulling me over and doing a search of my VEHICLE without a warrant and see how that ends up. What’s the difference? ZIP!

For those who think that the number of poachers will be reduced because we willingly let someone search our craft for whatever they want when they want, gimme some of what your smoking. That way I won’t be alert enough to realize I’m being infringed upon while the real problem quietly motors away up the lake after they saw the CO hope in my boat.

The Supreme Court can reverse their ruling and very likely should if their true reasoning is what was posted above. Maybe sooner or later someone with deeper pockets will re-try the case with an attorney that better presents the reasoning.

FWIW I personally have never been treated bad by a DNR warden. As a matter of fact I have welcomed them anytime I’ve seen them on the water or in the woods. I truely believe you get more flies with sugar than vinegar and that is a two way street. Someone eluded to CO’s or DNR acting in a specific manner because their job is tough (boo hoo) and many times people are armed. Maybe it is me but I think your less likely to be shot if the person your talking to doesn’t view you as a jerk.

I don’t even own an icehouse…or even ice fish. But…I still like that COs cannot just barge in anymore.

Heres another law that needs to be thrown out, the supposed privledge to fish in the public waters. Thats a bunch of bullroar, anyone that thinks fishing needs to be a privledge still lives in the stoneage, its our right as a American to enjoy our natural resources because we were born here, we pay taxes here and take care of the natural resources that we enjoy. These are more laws that need to be reversed, like many others that have been written into supposed laws.

What alot of people don’t realize is the public has been lawed to death. Fishng in a free country is supposed to be a right not a privledge. Its our resouces, its comes from the watersheds that we pay taxes on and our liscence fees pay to keep them in good shape for us Natural born citizens who are American to enjoy along with our familys, its not a privledge its our right as an American.

If theres certain people who abuse this natural resource then they need to be fined and warned not to do it again. If they continue to abuse it then its a privledge to them until they abuse it to the point that thier liscence needs to be revoked.

Any citizen that respects the laws when it comes to our natural resources then its a natural born right to fish the waters of our country, not a Privledge, I don’t Care what laws have been written into the books. We haven’t done anyhing wrong to our resouces, we haven’t aboused the fishing or the hunting. We turn in people who do, we don’t want inspections of our personal belongings because its wrong to stop us if we haven’t done anything wrong and if we do all these things its our natural born right as Americans to enjoy our natural resources, not a privledge.

If its a privledge then who am I in debt too and why am i considered an individual who should consider fishing my land in my own country a privledge? First of all who am I in debt too, who says i did anything wrong to be in debt too to be in this spot. If anyone thinks its my privledge and not my natural born right to fish my own countries land that all my for fathers have also fished boy have I got news for you. Its not your right, thinking these laws that you stand behind gives me the right to fish anywhere in (MY) own country and that I pay for a liscense and pay my taxes and was also born here to do just that. Who are these people to tell me its my privledge and not my right to enjoy what my country has to offer.

Anybody that thinks all the things that our country has to offer that its a privledge to enjoy these things and not a right as a natural born citizen ought to rethink what thier saying. We need laws to regulate situations and to keep that boat afloat but until we abuse a propper law its our right and not a privledge, if no ones ever told you that then i just did. If you were born here that your fore fathers have fought and died for then its your rights they were fighing for, not a privledge. If you haven’t abused anything then its your right not a privledge and it will stay that way until you abuse it. Theres an awful big diffrence between a natural born right when compared to a privledge. If this were the case then everything would be a privledge and not a right as a natural born citizen. Rights come first don’t they?

What gives you the right to tell me its my privledge to fish my neighbors stream and not my natural born right. Who are you anyway, did some one send you here to tell me what I can and can’t do when I’ve abided by all the laws and have done nothing wrong for it to then become a privledge. The United States Constitution and Bill of Rights that were drawn up by Thomas Jefferson, John Adams and Benjamin Franklin and that my fore fathers have fought for say so and until I break those laws where it then becomes a privledge,,,,these articles say so.

The 2007 regulations booklet pg.33: A person MUST allow inspection in the field of firearms,licenses,wild animals,motor vehicles,BOATS,or any other conveyances used while taking or transporting wild animals.

I am sure the fishing regs are very similar. These guys are helping preserve our resources!! Dont have anything to hide is my advice.

Well, there were several pages in the opinion of why the MN Supreme Court found that is was not a violation of the Fourth Amendment, but I just put out the summary of the case and my uneducated theory of what they mean. Don’t take my interpretation and get worked up. Find the case and read it yourself. In fact, find the cases that pertain to your state and read them.

Here is the link to the MN supreme court case. MN Supreme Court

And just a little education, the MN Supreme Court doesn’t just reverse their ruling. This case is done. It does not get re-tried. As I stated previously, this was one case and one set of circumstances, but this case is now used as precedence for other cases to follow. It will take a new case to make its way to the MN Supreme Court for this to be reversed. Good news though. You don’t live in MN so this doesn’t concern you, unless you come over here to fish.

From what I am reading, many of you seem to understand the Constitution better than the people in the courts. Maybe you need to go to school, become a lawyer, then after ‘lawyering’ for a while you can become a judge, and then get appointed to the Supreme Court so you can educate everybody on how it is. Oh and if it makes you feel better, you should read Judge Alan Pages dissenting opinion. He agrees pretty much agrees with you (I don’t think he agrees that just because you are born here it is your right do anything you want to until you are caught cheating).

Had a warden pull up alongside our boat while trolling in Minnesota. I started to reel in and he said just keep trolling. He idled along side and held onto our boat and put his in neutral. Asked if we were doing any good and I said one walleye so far and he said can I take a look. Said sure and he reached in and opened the livewell. He said a couple more like that and you and the missus will have a good meal. Asked if I had a license and I started to reach for my billfold and he said no that OK, I believe you. He told me to try a little further around the point as they have been catching some good ones there. I told him thanks and hope you catch the violators. He smiled, said thanks, put his boat in gear aimed out away from us and slowly moved away. He was happy, I was happy, never had to stop fishing, he did his job and I kept doing mine.
See no problem with this.

Did have a problem with Wisconsin DNR. While trolling they zoomed right up to us, not smiling, fierce looking, almost gestapo like and told us to shut everything down, then proceeded to check license,fire ext, livewell, life jackets,etc. When finished they zoomed out wide open throwing a wake.

Didn’t have a problem with the check, just the way they did it. Two different wardens doing the same job but one left you with a good feeling and the other two left you with a little bitterness, and P O’d at their attitude.

If ALL wardens were like the Wi. two I can see why some people would resent being checked out, and if all were like the Minn. one don’t think anyone would object.

B Curtis is correct.

You simply do not have any expectation of privacy in a boat, and a CO can search the livewell.

In a motor vehicle, you don’t have any expectation of privacy either. Any officer can search your entire vehicle, but they do need probable cause if you do not consent. If you demand the officer get a warrant to search your vehicle, good luck with that. Probable cause is pretty loose. A smell, a sight, any reason for the officer to believe a crime was committed.

If I were ever asked by an officer to search my car when I know I have done nothing wrong, I would ask for his/her probable cause and go from there…

In a fishhouse, that is a different story. A CO needs a warrant to enter if you do not grant permission. It’s unfortunate for the resources..

Great thread!

Check my boat, equipment and livewell any time you like Mr C.O. and thanks for the great job you guys are doing….

Quote:

---

Didn’t have a problem with the check, just the way they did it. Two different wardens doing the same job but one left you with a good feeling and the other two left you with a little bitterness, and P O’d at their attitude.

---

I think this statement represents the way a majority of fisherman feel….
I too have experienced both types of encounters with CO’s
I know they are human BUT…..a little respect on BOTH ends goes a long way.
Great post BOBBYB

I’ve often put CO’s in the same boat as judge’s.
Yep, they are both human. Some have crabby personalities (But we find that anywhere, don’t we? Who “hasn’t” ever had a crabby boss?)

Take a judge for example. A person has to go to court for a minor traffic violation……You last name is “Wellman”, so going by alphabetical order, you sit waiting from 9am to about 2pm, waiting your turn.
The first person comes up to the judge and it is simple…..painless for the judge.
The second person comes up, doing something stupid like arguing with the judge.
Then the third person comes up and the judge is angry with the dumb guy before him, so it puts him in a crabby mood, only to be fueld by the third guy for lying to the judge.
and so on
and so on
and so on
By the time the “Wellman” guy see’s the judge at 5 hours later and 20 names, he is so frustrated with stupid people, that I can’t even get a simple speeding ticket negotiated off my record…….Yea, the judge is crabby and has a “bad attitude”.

I’m willing to be this happens with COs too. The majority of the people they talk to are good. But when they find one, two, or three nimrods who are breaking the law and aruging with the CO, giving him a hard time, he day is going to just get worse.

Normally,
Judges, cops, and CO’s deal with the “stupid people” of our society when they “have to deal” with people. That will get some people in a sour attitude, even when they have to converse with someone who is not so stupid.

Gary, change your last name to Andersen.

Or he could see your name is Wellman and throw your A$$ in the can on general principles.

I plead the 5th Whisker!!!!!!!!

I agree with everything thats been said, but theres still one little thing that I consider a law that needs to be overthown, searching without a reasonable cause. Anytime a CO has asked me for my liscense I’ve gladly showed him. A liscense inspection on the water or anywhere is a must because a person has to have one in order to fish. The money I spent goes twards keeping our fishing in the best shape that the dnr can and thats another reason I don’t mind spending it. The problem I have with searches instead of just checking my liscense is it takes time out of my day and what im doing when I haven’t done anything wrong to begin with. They catch as many poachers as they can, I’ve turned in a few too, and I appreciate that very much but when it comes to searches thats not right without a cause.

Sure I could have taken way over my limit but I didn’t so why the search of my livewell if they haven’t got a substancle reason. I could have a freezer full of trout but I don’t so why check my freezer. I know game wardens aren’t going to check my freezer because any sensible warden knows its not neccessary because they haven’t seen me or has anybody else seen me taking more then im allowed, I know most wardens don’t do this because they have more sense then that.

If someone gave them an intentional false tip then its not the wardens fault but that person who said I did and thier liable and thats what lawyers are for. Buy no means do I think wardens just check someones freezer because they just want too, they do it for a Good reason. Im sure most wardens get proof befor they ask to see whats in my freezer because they don’t want to waist thier or my time. Beings all of these things are the way they are then why the search, its not necessary and unwarranted.

To me there has to be a line drawn somewhere and unless anyones got proof befor they search then theres no reasonable cause. Maybe to an officer who hasen’t got anything better to do and is still learning but thats what search laws are for, too keep them from waisting my time. Have I gone to study law, no but I still know search laws have to be justified in order to proceed with a search and just because joe blow did something wrong dosen’t mean I did. I completely understand a search of my livewell if someone thought they seen me keeping too many fish, thats not the wardens fault by any means. If no one has got any proof that I’ve or anyone has kept over a limit then theres no need for a search. To me its not right to search anyone just because someone else does something wrong, infact its an insult, thats what the rights of privacy means to me.

Oh they are just doing their job, let them search you. After all it catches poachers.

On that note then why not:
Invite them to search your home. After-all as a home owner it is very possible you also run a brothel. Might as well weed out all houses of ill repute right?

Invite them pull you over on your way to work. After-all as a vehicle owner and operator your most likely going to drink and drive and speed while doing it. What better time to weed out the OWI’s and speeders than on our way to work?

Give them the code to your gun safe. After-all as a gun owner you no doubt own at least one illegal gun and some bomb making materials. Might as well weed out the terrorists before they hurt anyone.

You see these are merely examples of privileges and not rights. And as such The Man has the right to butter up His arm and stick it in whatever orifice He sees fit. Why dare and expect reasonable privacy when taking part in a activity deemed a privilege?

I’m being sarcastic towards the laws as defined by the courts. They are ludicrous and antiquated and too much blood has been spilled to ensure my protection from unreasonable search and seizure. However what really fills my boat with water is how easily so many are convinced to give up their freedoms and rights in order to make someones job go easier because, boo hoo, they have a hard job to do. Don’t we all?

Quote:

---

I don’t Care what laws have been written into the books.

---

And that right there is the whole problem with attitudes like that when people think that they are above the law and that the law does not apply to them, give me a break!!! It’s no wonder that some of these Game Wardens have bad attitudes if they have to deal with people like this all day long. You do not have to agree with laws but you do have to obey them or pay the piper.

Quote:

---

so many are convinced to give up their freedoms and rights in order to make someones job go easier because, boo hoo, they have a hard job to do. Don’t we all?

---

Sorry man but they do have a hard job. Not sure what you do for a living but do you do to work knowing anyone your going to be dealing with more than likely has a gun on them???

Or if your in EMS Sorry Mr. and Mrs. so and so your baby is dead tonight we tried everything we could.

Or if your firefighter Sorry Mr. and Mrs. so and so we could not save your house we also were unable to locate any of your pets. Sorry for your loss.

How bout if your a cop? Judge I pulled this person over for speeding 15 mph over the speed limit. They became irrate when I asked to see thier MN DL. They then called me #$%$% #@$#%$ @$@.

People that do these jobs are good people just like you and me. But I think they are special people. And you just proved to me why they need to keep doing their job.

Your job may be hard but I bet it does not keep you up at night.

You have no idea what these people go through.

Last two lines deleted by briank

Quote:

---

Oh they are just doing their job, let them search you. After all it catches poachers.

On that note then why not:
Invite them to search your home. After-all as a home owner it is very possible you also run a brothel. Might as well weed out all houses of ill repute right?

Invite them pull you over on your way to work. After-all as a vehicle owner and operator your most likely going to drink and drive and speed while doing it. What better time to weed out the OWI’s and speeders than on our way to work?

Give them the code to your gun safe. After-all as a gun owner you no doubt own at least one illegal gun and some bomb making materials. Might as well weed out the terrorists before they hurt anyone.

You see these are merely examples of privileges and not rights. And as such The Man has the right to butter up His arm and stick it in whatever orifice He sees fit. Why dare and expect reasonable privacy when taking part in a activity deemed a privilege?

I’m being sarcastic towards the laws as defined by the courts. They are ludicrous and antiquated and too much blood has been spilled to ensure my protection from unreasonable search and seizure. However what really fills my boat with water is how easily so many are convinced to give up their freedoms and rights in order to make someones job go easier because, boo hoo, they have a hard job to do. Don’t we all?

---

Thankyou, Riverrat – for putting my feelings perfectly into words. I, too, refuse to give up my rights for the reasons you stated.

Tim

Hey guys, this is a hot topic of course.

All personal attacks or name calling will get us is a lock thread.

Steve thats not at all what I meant and im not mad or frustated in the least and i want to clearify what my thoughts are and why i feel the way i do. I understand yours and everybody elses thoughts and feelings on this, I really do. Just because people who follow the law, like I do, and have no problem with searches dosen’t mean its ok for them to put that into law because a lawyer takes it to court and wins, that makes the law community feel they have to draw in new laws to cover so next time they can win. What is wrong with following the Bill of Rights here on searches. Isn’t the origional laws of this country good enough to live by.

The men who who drew these laws up were scholars and very well educated on searches and seizures and law, after all they just fought a war with Britian and were subject to searches all the time. They knew what searches were and Situations were the same then as they are now. Whats wrong with upholding the laws of the Bill of Rights and why do some people think thier not good enough to serve the public with the situations today. Sure we know theres diffrent situations but problems are problems and crimes are crimes so i’ll bet they fall under any guidelines in the Bill of Rights.

Theres very good and through reasons why they drew up this Bill the way they did, so it covers all laws and situations and its a form to live our lives by in its origional content. What I and alot of people have a problem with is modern law likes to take and turn this origional bill to thier favor and needs and thats not right. Laws have to be formed and drawn up to meet certain needs but to some the origional Bill of Rights covers all the guidelines and shouldn’t be strayed from. Whats going to happen is years down the road these origional Bill Of Rights is going to just be print on paper and not looked at as our origional guidelines to make laws for this country to live by, thats what worries alot of people. No One offends me thinking that the origional bill dosen’t cover everything but i’ll bet if a person really breaks it down they will see that these laws are written for a purpose and should be stood beside. Situations that are considered for new laws I’ll bet are already covered by this bill, everything outside of this bill should be excepted to protect freedom and right of individuals or there will be laws complicating everyones lives. This is the way I want my laws to be drawn up and lived by or it encroaches on everybodys freedom.

Well here in the state of Minnesota, I am not giving up my rights or freedoms letting them search my live well. I am following the law. Why, because the law states they can search my live well and the Supreme Court says it is a legal search. You guys can stand there in your boats arguing that George Mason says you can’t be searched, go ahead. Hopefully you will get ticketed and then you will have the opportunity to fight it all the way to the top. To me, it may or may not be an invasion of privacy. For right now in MN, it is legal to search and I follow the law.

Riveratt and mossydan, I don’t know for sure, but didn’t the Patriot Act open up the possibility of the government searching properties without a warrant? I don’t know for sure, but I thought that was one of the complaints about it. In fact didn’t the Patriot Act come under a lot of fire because it is changing people’s ‘rights’? This is just an example of how your ‘rights’ change over based on the courts opinion.

Each case is unique and it is the job of the courts to interpret the constitution and amendments and determine if there was a violation in that case. That is why it is a big deal when a new Supreme Court justice is being appointed because based on the makeup of the supreme court, your rights can be changed drastically and remain that way for a long time.

Not to change subjects, but what about gun laws? What do you guys think of 10 day waiting periods, conceal and carry, etc? You must hate those laws because they violate your Second Amendment right to bear arms.

Quote:

---

Not to change subjects, but what about gun laws? What do you guys think of 10 day waiting periods, conceal and carry, etc? You must hate those laws. because they violate your Second Amendment right to bear arms.

---

Yup.

Tim

Quote:

---

Sorry man but they do have a hard job. Not sure what you do for a living but do you do to work knowing anyone your going to be dealing with more than likely has a gun on them???

---

Sorry dude but people choose their jobs. Don’t come crying to me that yours is harder than mine, you won’t find any sympathy from me. The end of your thought above seems to indicate that hunters are thugs. I just know that’s not what you mean. Right?

The job doesn’t make the person, the person makes the job. All men are created equal and having this job or that doesn’t make any person more or less special than the next guy. I hope peoples waders are not this full of holes, if so I hope you know how to swim!

I do follow the law plain and simple. As a professional I’m expected to treat my clients with the respect they deserve and many times much more. Public servants are no different. If they can’t then find something new to do not dealing with the sectors biggest PITA…Civilians!