In the act of preparing a meal?

Obviously you guys don’t do the cooking around your homes if you think preparing a meal involves putting something in the refrigerator and watching tv.

Here is the full wording from the legislature.

https://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/rules/?id=6262.0100

From the dictionary-

Preparation:
1. the act or process of preparing

I will say it again, if you have no other actions going such as heating the oil; placing fillets into a bag and setting it on the ice stops the preparation process. Argue all you want about semantics, grey areas, etc.. “Preparation” is well defined in the dictionary.

Attachments:

1. 

   IMG_2186.jpg
   

I tell my customers if they are having them for lunch or dinner do not clean them in the morning? Have all the ingredients out , salt pepper, magic fry/batter eggs milk ect. Had two different customers this year running off the same generator. Rick and his brothers had cleaned fish in the morning. They got a warning.
Pang had 2 fish cleaned and two that were still whole. He had the carcasses also. The warden confiscated his 4 fillets 2 fish and made him keep the carcasses as part of his limit? He also got a warning. I think its pretty simple if your going to eat them have every thing out,clean them rinse them and cook them. If you fillet them and put them in a bag, then outside or under the house They think your more inclined to poach? still not sure why they took Pangs and not Ricks as it basically happened with in minutes of each other? I also heard of a warded that gave some fishermen fish he had confiscated? here say but still kinda weird? Do those fish count against those guys?

Ridiculous citation.
What if the “Offender” enjoys eating his catch raw after allowing the fillets to firm up a bit in a bag on ice for a couple minutes.
Would not the act of letting the fillets cool before eating them be an act of preparation?
What if his religion requires this step before consumption?

The warden in question was very friendly and knew that it was not a good law, he even stated that it wasn’t super clear and he would not even look us in the eye after he wrote out the citation tab, didn’t even say have a good day or anything prior to leaving and also made it clear that it was not his intention to ruin our fishing trip, it was a lesson learned for both of us, going forward I will be asking questions before hand. I knew that it stated that you could not clean the fish unless it was in the act of preparing for a meal, I guess in my defense and also in my guilt, I had my own interpretation to what that meant, I always wash my fillets well and keep them in a bowl of water with a little salt prior to cooking them or putting them in a seal bag for freezing, I also will let them sit out of water for a bit prior to cooking them (in the fridge of course) as that way the egg tends to stick better on a dry fillet than a wet one, it is what it is and we split the ticket and now we know. I’m not super impressed with the law in question as what difference does it make but thats not for me to decide… Keep a tight line!!!

” The warden confiscated his 4 fillets 2 fish and made him keep the carcasses as part of his limit?”

Hows is that possible? How could he take the uncleaned fish? Sound to me like the CO or his friends wanted walleye for dinner that night.

suzuki wrote:

” The warden confiscated his 4 fillets 2 fish and made him keep the carcasses as part of his limit?”

Hows is that possible? How could he take the uncleaned fish? Sound to me like the CO or his friends wanted walleye for dinner that night.

I read that as he took the 4 fillets(the 2 cleaned fish), not he took all 4 fish.

Correct, he took the 4 fillets. He did leave the 2 carcasses as we had to still count them toward our bag limit.

pyclub1 wrote:

The warden in question was very friendly and knew that it was not a good law, he even stated that it wasn’t super clear and he would not even look us in the eye after he wrote out the citation tab, didn’t even say have a good day or anything prior to leaving and also made it clear that it was not his intention to ruin our fishing trip, it was a lesson learned for both of us, going forward I will be asking questions before hand.

Oh, he felt bad and didn’t want to ruin your day, and still wrote you the citation after stating the law wasnt clear?

My take on it is that he spotted a potential citation, made a quick mental note of your home location vs the probablity of you returning to fight it in court, and decided that it was a good investment of time to issue the ticket. Your intentions and your feelings weren’t a factor.

My guess is that he wouldn’t look yu in the eyes because he knew it wasn’t necessary to cite yu for it, but he was doing so anyway. A day in court would probably get that tossed out, IMO.

sticker wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>suzuki wrote:</div>
” The warden confiscated his 4 fillets 2 fish and made him keep the carcasses as part of his limit?”

Hows is that possible? How could he take the uncleaned fish? Sound to me like the CO or his friends wanted walleye for dinner that night.

I read that as he took the 4 fillets(the 2 cleaned fish), not he took all 4 fish.

Got it now. Still sounds fishy.

CO’s have the ability to issue a warning. Gray area it still is imo. Spell it out in clear cut English vs the act of preparing that any good third year law student could argue one way or the other for or against.

It sounds like one cannot even have a traditional shore lunch anymore no matter how hard you try and make it legal, that’s just great. You wouldn’t believe how reports like this shy people away from enjoying ice fishing and fishing in general. Shore lunches no matter where you are always great !

Launches on LOW don’t seem to worried about any of this from what I’ve noticed. Shouldn’t they have to keep their carcasses intact when doing a shore lunch? Who’s to say a group couldn’t go on a launch in the am, then head out on their own in the evening? Where’s the line for getting rid of a carcass?

Timmy wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>pyclub1 wrote:</div>
The warden in question was very friendly and knew that it was not a good law, he even stated that it wasn’t super clear and he would not even look us in the eye after he wrote out the citation tab, didn’t even say have a good day or anything prior to leaving and also made it clear that it was not his intention to ruin our fishing trip, it was a lesson learned for both of us, going forward I will be asking questions before hand.

Oh, he felt bad and didn’t want to ruin your day, and still wrote you the citation after stating the law wasnt clear?

My take on it is that he spotted a potential citation, made a quick mental note of your home location vs the probablity of you returning to fight it in court, and decided that it was a good investment of time to issue the ticket. Your intentions and your feelings weren’t a factor.

My guess is that he wouldn’t look yu in the eyes because he knew it wasn’t necessary to cite yu for it, but he was doing so anyway. A day in court would probably get that tossed out, IMO.

This story is clearly missing some details. I have come across exactly ZERO COs in my life who are out to get anglers, write tickets, and confiscate fillets (and I’d bet I’ve been around longer than most posters here).

Give the COs a break if you don’t know the entire story. They’re trying to preserve our natural resources with vague laws drafted by politicians who don’t know a walleye from their a$$.

Timmy wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>pyclub1 wrote:</div>
The warden in question was very friendly and knew that it was not a good law, he even stated that it wasn’t super clear and he would not even look us in the eye after he wrote out the citation tab, didn’t even say have a good day or anything prior to leaving and also made it clear that it was not his intention to ruin our fishing trip, it was a lesson learned for both of us, going forward I will be asking questions before hand.

Oh, he felt bad and didn’t want to ruin your day, and still wrote you the citation after stating the law wasnt clear?

My take on it is that he spotted a potential citation, made a quick mental note of your home location vs the probablity of you returning to fight it in court, and decided that it was a good investment of time to issue the ticket. Your intentions and your feelings weren’t a factor.

My guess is that he wouldn’t look yu in the eyes because he knew it wasn’t necessary to cite yu for it, but he was doing so anyway. A day in court would probably get that tossed out, IMO.

This story is clearly missing some details. I have come across exactly ZERO COs in my life who are out to get anglers, write tickets, and confiscate fillets (and I’d bet I’ve been around longer than most posters here).

Give the COs a break if you don’t know the entire story. They’re trying to preserve our natural resources with vague laws drafted by politicians who don’t know a walleye from their a$$. They’re up against impossible odds with today’s anglers in their wheelhouses with cameras, flashers, and social media. It’s absurd to see supposed outdoorsmen ridicule the people who are preserving your resources.

A wise man once told me that “You can’t fix stupid.”

So, both myself and the person with me have explained the story, but now we are lying or “missing some details”? I have not bashed the COs once. I left it alone after Munchy posted the actual rule. I do not agree with the vagueness of how the law is shared with the public. Once reading the full description of the law, we did not do it correctly, but it sounds like a lot of other people are as clueless as we were! I have not once bashed the CO during this thread and you will not hear me bash them. Could he have taken it easier on us? Sure could have, but these guys have a very difficult job and do a very good job!

walleye1274 wrote:

So, both myself and the person with me have explained the story, but now we are lying or “missing some details”? I have not bashed the COs once. I left it alone after Munchy posted the actual rule. I do not agree with the vagueness of how the law is shared with the public. Once reading the full description of the law, we did not do it correctly, but it sounds like a lot of other people are as clueless as we were! I have not once bashed the CO during this thread and you will not hear me bash them. Could he have taken it easier on us? Sure could have, but these guys have a very difficult job and do a very good job!

Great post.

CO’s are burdened by gray areas. The one by our hunting camp can’t get trespassing to stick because of proving land is legally posted. It irritates the peanuts out of CO’s.

buckybadger wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Timmy wrote:</div>

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>pyclub1 wrote:</div>
The warden in question was very friendly and knew that it was not a good law, he even stated that it wasn’t super clear and he would not even look us in the eye after he wrote out the citation tab, didn’t even say have a good day or anything prior to leaving and also made it clear that it was not his intention to ruin our fishing trip, it was a lesson learned for both of us, going forward I will be asking questions before hand.

Oh, he felt bad and didn’t want to ruin your day, and still wrote you the citation after stating the law wasnt clear?

My take on it is that he spotted a potential citation, made a quick mental note of your home location vs the probablity of you returning to fight it in court, and decided that it was a good investment of time to issue the ticket. Your intentions and your feelings weren’t a factor.

My guess is that he wouldn’t look yu in the eyes because he knew it wasn’t necessary to cite yu for it, but he was doing so anyway. A day in court would probably get that tossed out, IMO.

This story is clearly missing some details. I have come across exactly ZERO COs in my life who are out to get anglers, write tickets, and confiscate fillets (and I’d bet I’ve been around longer than most posters here).

Give the COs a break if you don’t know the entire story. They’re trying to preserve our natural resources with vague laws drafted by politicians who don’t know a <strong class=”ido-tag-strong”>walleye from their a$$.

I disagree. Some CO’s will write a ticket to a guy from out of state and give a resident a warning. Seen it done. Same violation 2 different results. Just because it was a 4 hour drive for the court date I think the officer knew my BIL wouldn’t take off work for $150 ticket.
You hear alot of complaints about wardens SOME of them are justified.