DNR Must have probable cause…..

Acceptance of random search is (at best) difficult for me, as those who talked with me at the get-together probably could have guessed.

The “if your not doing anything wrong you have nothing to fear” argument is bogus. I’m sure that we would all be willing to carry cards that allow targeting of individuals by a space-based death-ray which allows the president to eliminate “problem citizens,” either.

Police powers are granted by the people during times when they have nothing to worry about – then abused by those who come to power at a later date. In the above example, none of us really have anything to worry about, until the next Bill Clinton gets elected and has a button created that’s simply labeled “NRA members.”

Consider also the following example: A man sues the DNR for harassment. His case is seemingly quite strong, as every Saturday morning, the DNR is waiting outside his house when he wakes up. They follow him to the ramp, and search his truck. Nothing. He heads out fishing. Every hour, on the hour, the CO stops him and tears his boat apart looking for an illegal fish. When he gets fed-up and heads back to the ramp, the CO searches his boat again – nothing… searches his truck again… nothing… makes him empty his pockets and pats him down… nothing… follows him home, enters the house, and checks the freezer… nothing.

When the judge asks the CO why, he can say, “Because I don’t like the guy,” and is still perfectly within the enforcement limits set forth. All this ruling does is say that everyone has to play by the same rules.

To say that more people will automatically do the wrong thing is questionable in my opinion as well – how many people currently take home their legal limit every time they go out fishing? The rapid spread of CPR is a credit to fishermen everywhere and a positive indicator that we are realizing that self-policing is an invaluable tool for sustained fisheries.

I too have been on the fence for many days with this issue. I’ve decided that I’m siding with the Bill of Rights. I do think any law enforcement official must have probable cause to search my property, it’s my right, according to my constitution.

Now, with that being said, I’ll offer any CO a chance to hop in the boat and check the live wells, gear, etc… I figure I’ll treat him like I want to be treated. If he’s a jerk, then I’ll ask for his badge number and I’ll report it to his “manager”. Many of my experiences with CO’s has been guilty until proven innocent, even by a friend who is a CO. I don’t care for this mentality, but I certainly don’t let it bother me. I personally would hate my job if I was constantly skeptical as they must be. If I’ve done something illegal, then right me the ticket. I screwed up, I’ll pay the price for my stupidity. I’m not going to use the bill of rights to hide behind either, even if I know I’m a life jacket short, or my horn doesn’t work. Just one fisherman’s opinion…..

Down here in Iowa; on the river & lakes, I consider myself one who has spent a lot of time on the water. Why shoot… I’ve only been stopped maybe four times total! I’ve been asked what I caught by the survey guy quite a few times. Maybe the priorities are more in the class room for the Iowa DNR. I Don’t like to be hastled but kind of wish they would check alittle more often just to keep some of the honest fishermen on the right track. {John}

I admit, I do get a little nervous each time I am checked by a CO, but that is ALWAYS based on “hmmmm… where did I put my license? is it in my tackle box? Is it in my wallet? hmmm… here’s last years! here’s my library card. would a Amex card help…? Wait Wait I found it!!!!!” My mother always said I’d lose my head if it was not screwed on, and I relive that each and every time that a CO checks me.

However, I have never felt harassed by a CO. Actually each and every time it has been a pleasant experience. I’ve gotten plenty good advice on where, when, and what they are biting on. 20+ years ago when hunting, a CO actually fixed an old shotgun of a friend I was hunting with.

I realize not everyone has had such good experiences. Maybe my positve experience’s cloud my judgement, or maybe it is my frustration when I hear of great abuses of fish and game conservation limits. But I hope they do something to remedy this.

What I find intresting is the sentiment that people have that all of a sudden now, people who have been normal law abiding citizens, will now become poachers, and law breakers? I know a few wardens, and am damn glad to have them around. They do a fantastic job in light of the environment they are forced to work in. In what other form on law enforcement are officers sent out into the field where the public is carrying shotguns, rifles, pistols, and the like? (Well, there is the inner city…) It is a very dangerous line of work. Tempers flare, and the “Potential” is there for disaster. That being said….The constitution is what is at issue here. We are protected by the constitution from unlawful search and seziure. Not having probable cause was found to be unlawful in the case of the wardens powers. Let me ask you all this…What if the liberal powers that be decide at some point that guns are going to be illegal. Is that OK? Will you stand up for your rights then? Or, if what we say on this board offends some government official, say the comments put forward recently on the St. Croix issue? They could come over to your house and arrest you because you said what you felt?!? How do we pick and chose what parts of the constitution we want to keep or get rid of. We have freedoms in this country that a lot of other countries dream of! Why do you think so many people are trying to get in here. I will keep the rights afforded to me by the constitution as they are, thanks. Wardens now have to live by those rules as we do. If we want to bitch, lets get the judicial system to punish the violators, and enforce the laws that we HAVE on the books. I really do not think that people are going to flip a switch and become criminals just because of this.

Chris, your argument depends on personal integrity, which most of us have. However it has been my observation there are many people out there that do not have it to our degree and need be deterred by the possibility of getting caught. I still believe this change opens a door that should remain closed, like it has for so many years.

I see your point Suzuki and I also agree with you. Unfortunately I also agree this lawyers rights were infringed upon. So here is my proposed solution to help deter these thugs from raping our resources. Not only should the laws be written for stronger punishment, but they should affect the poachers in areas other than hunting/fishing privileges.

Let’s say you get caught with a gross over the limit, which would need to be defined per species. Take away the guys hunting/fishing privileges for life. Then get all the states to cross reference other states databases before issueing licenses. Then take the guys drivers license away for a year. They do it all the time with dead beat dads. Sure, this isn’t fool proof. In my world(it’s mostly a jig and minnow bite here), this would deter the guys that are on the fence. The guys that go to the river 3 times a day, nothing will stop them until caught red handed.

Yes this decision hand cuffs the DNR compared to how they are used to doing things. They’ll just have to do like the city cops and get a probable cause. Although I don’t necessarily like the decision, I think the DNR has many avenues in which to pursue alternatives. When you get a drivers license you agree to submit to a breath analysis or lose your license for a year. Can’t they do the same with fishing licenses????? Just thinking out loud…..

One more thought, since our voices do seem to make a difference, St Croix gates(Thanks JonJ). Maybe we, the guys that truely care about our resources, should start writing our congressmen/women and stress the importance of stiffer penalities for violators. Help the DNR get the right to search anyone with a fishing license….. I’m open to suggestions!!

I can see your point and agree that deterence is the key. Whether its more inspections and lesser panalties like before or less inspections and stiffer penalties. It would work out the same. I just think that one way or another people cannot be left entirely to their own devices in this matter because there are to many that can’t handle that sort of responsibility.

Unfortunately your are correct.

It’s interesting how extreme hypothetical stories arise when topics such as this one come up. Gianni’s latest post is the perfect example. Does this ever happen?! And if it does, then let’s deal with it by getting rid of these bad CO’s just like we get rid of bad cops who abuse their authority. Give me a REAL example of the DNR harrassing someone like that instead of a made up one. That’s what’s bogus–imaginary scenarios. I don’t see them or any law officers (except in LA, and they are dealt with there–as they should be) badgering like they do in these made up stories. All we’re talking about here is whether the DNR can look at our fish. They’re not coming into our boats, cars, homes or anywhere else to see if we’re conspiring something. Yet that seems to be the prevailing paranoia on this very simple and basic issue. I can’t believe there are so many card carrying outdoorsmen who DON’T want the CO’s to do their job of hindering those who would threaten what we want so badly to protect. The best way for this to get done is to keep from restricting them from something that they have been doing for decades. Several posters have said that they don’t have a problem with showing their catch even though they may be strong individual rights supporters. Why would anyone who wants our natural resources protected be opposed to CO’s simply checking for foul play? I don’t get it–some of us here want to throw the baby out with the bath water to have rights protected which aren’t even threatened in the first place.

Where is this going? All I’m hearing is a lot of barking! Barking from 2 points of view that aren’t correct, nor are they incorrect. They’re just 2 points of view. Now, 1 person stopped barking and took it to the DNR. Now the rest of us are yippin’ again. The answer isn’t in who’s right or wrong, but to find the adjustment that works for both sides.

Idea: I’m not going to pursue this, but if anyone would like to take the credit for it, have at any of the suggestions you want.

Skipping any views of having God given rights (because biblically there’s more to it than that and I didn’t come here to lay out any sermons) I’d like a ponder a thought or two.

It’s not our right to drive. If we want to drive, we have to obtain a license. We aren’t randomly searched to show that license, but what about the car? It comes with a plate. Other vehicles (boats, cycles, atv’s………) are tagged with registrations or licenses too, but it says nothing of our status as an individual. To hunt big game, you must display a backtag, or “license plate” if you will. So, let’s establish a one time earned license to fish or hunt, and then sell “license plates”? What a pain! But, it would prevent the random search! Pin it on a hat, tag it to a belt loop or on an arm band, the back of a jacket when it gets cold…………….there are options. Now, just like a trooper sits roadside, the CO’s can sit lakeside and look, without invading, who’s legal to fish and who isn’t and also watch for violating activity, again, without invading. Everything is already in place to see something like this implemented, so why not?

How about we have laws regarding all animals (we practically do anyhow), tax EVERYONE an extra $100 a year and just let us all hunt and fish freely??? Well, you and I both know we pay for things we don’t condone or support but have no say in…………so let the opposing parties freak out! We’re all about the preservation of a resource anyway so let them bark!

Ice shacks? Limit them to 3 wall shelters, with or without a roof. You can bring a trailer or tent to sleep in but you can’t fish from it. Your “backtags” will be visible as will your catches. All they have to do is walk/drive around and see the obvious.

Sure, we could do nothing and still worry about not finding the “bad guys”. So, if it’s really a concern, what should we do about it? Level the playing field in comparison to other licensed activities because the DNR just got put on a level?

There’s a lot of barking but what are we doing, or what have we been doing to really help both views???

I take too long to post sometimes! By the time I posted there were 5 more posts in place! Juggs, I’m with what you said! It keeps it easy!

I’ll admit it’s a fine line we’re walking here and I find myself unsure at times which side of the fence I’m on but,those of you that don’t think this ruling will cause some people to abuse our resources,9/11 is a prime example.When law enforcement had to change from drug interdiction to terrorist watch,drug smuggling skyrocketed.To me,the handwriting is on the wall.Mike

bump

Well this is a subject I know about. I taught the new recruits at the chicago P.d . I remmember when the miranda rule went into affect in the 1960,s all law enforcement paniced thinking that why after 200 yrs of existance should law officers have to tell people their rights, Well the answer is because someone convinced the courts that goverment officials (police) were getting confessions by trickery and long hours of interigation.So because of this abuse the maranda warning was required. Some yelled( well if you have nothing to hide whats te worry about). Well thats not the issue, as some one stated today it,s your car next your house. Remember the writers of the bill of rights thought that the 10 amendments were the basic rights of every human being on earth.(talk about liberal commies) and because of the abuse in England this 10 amendments were fresh in their minds.well the miranda turned out to be a good thing because now a confession can be admitted in evidence with out much question. when asked by defence console if he confessed and the officer states yes even after the miranda this puts his client on the hook.I also heard someone mention probable cause and with some humor and sadness also that most people think probable cause is when you see a guy putting 20 walleyes in his live well and you think that if you tell the warden then he can run over and make a search and seizer basses on your statement,wrong, If the warden see,s someone put 20 walleyes in the livewell he can arest him, but not because you told him.Now this becomes tricky,and there willbe further discussion on this by the courts. In a citizen witness of contribane or illigel activity the citizen must be taken in front of a judge,swear under oath , and tell the judge what he saw. If the judge believes him a warrent for search will be given. The judge will list ONLY the things that can be searched NO FISHING EXPIDITION BY POLICE, any thing found snooping will be dismissed. Now what I,v Told is for a dwelling. If your next door buddy saw you taking in some funny looking weeds that he thought was Marijuana that is what the police would have to do,have the next door buddy go before the judge. Now what about boats,thier mobile and by the time a citizen goes in front of a judge and the CO,s get the warrant the guy is home eating the evidence. Their is a difference between the rules governing search of houses and moving vehicals like boats and cars searching a house you must have a warrant, the house is not mobile you have time to get a warrant. In a boat or car you may not need more than a citizen complaint in order for a CO to make a search,but even this may come under scrutiny if the citizen does not appear at the trial date as a matter of 28 yrs. on Chicago P.D. I can state that the case WILL BE TOSSED if the witness does not show.Another point I would like to make is the power of the DNR. Let me introduce a michigan supreme court dicision that is being as the grandfather of this particular issue. The case was 20 yrs. Ago it involved the administrative authority of a arson investigator to enter a dwelling with out a warrant. the court ruled that even though the state of michigan ,by statue, gave the investigator the authority to enter a dwelling without a warrant and look for the cause of the fire. Well the court stated no no. Since arson is a crime and searching for evidence without a warrant is a violation.This is what the DNR has been telling the people that they don,t need a warrant to look in your freezer but I bet a million bucks that if you tell them to get a warant or back off they will back off if you let them search well then YOU GAVE PERMISSION. And I bet on those high profile casses you will see that they had warrants bassed on extensive survalence. The reason the courts make these desitions is because the government over steped thier athority and someone had enough guts and MONEY to fight them. So as someone mentioned this will still be dicussed in courts. Will a citizen be able to report a violator to a CO and that will be probable cause without warrant as is a car because it,s mobile or will the courts rule that citizen witnessing event have to swear in front of judge to get action. interesting

The story of people getting checked coming across the border is true. The CO’s even tore the paneling out of the camper walls in search of illegal fish. I have personally been stopped twice in one day – by the same officer. The first time on the boat to check PFD’s and safety equipment (question, is this too difficult for me to do that I need a ‘pro’?) and the second time at the ramp to see my catch – or lack thereof.

My question is: Where are all of these abusers who can’t handle abiding by the law? Why didn’t we turn them in before when the DNR could readily search? It seems we’re mistaking what someone could do with what people are doing.

One of the reasons (opinion here) that the DNR is so friendly now is that with only 2 officers per county – in Iowa – there is no way on God’s green earth they could possibly do an effective job of policing illicit activity. What they do know is that fishermen are by and large a good bunch and will readily report miscreants. If someone were to generate the stats, my guess would be that 90% of the busts the DNR makes are from calls by do-gooders like us who are out there every day. So if they rely on us for the majority of their information, nothing has really changed.

Here’s some other links. If you grant power, it will be abused.

When the cops cover the camera, you know some high quality policework is about to take place.

Oops, sorry, you’re dead.

This one’s a real gem, random stops by off-duty police – for a market survey.

In SW Wisconsin here I can say that all my dealings with COs have been friendly encounters. When asked to show my fish I have done so with no hesitation out of common courtesy.That being said I still want the right to stop an unwarranted search. Just because I have “nothing to hide” doesn’t mean that I have to give up my rights to unreasonable searches. I don’t think its much different than driving a car. The officer doesn’t have the right to search your car without a warrant so why would we enable a CO to do searches without them? I know that a COs job would be alot easier withoout a warrant but so would a police officers, just think how many more drug arrests their would be without having to get a warrant to search a car. But we don’t allow them because of some of the instances that Gianni posted. I’m still one of those that feel most people are generally good. If you think alot of people will suddenly break laws because of that court ruling then you should really fear law enforcement without the checks that the Bill of Rights puts on them. I’m not running down law enforcement(my son is currently going to school to be an officer) but they do need guidelines, the guidelines that the Bill of Rights outlines and the court recently affirmed.

Thanks Old Ranger !

A lock will keep an “Honest Person” honest, But it won’t keep a “Crook” honest !!

Richard (Smitty)
Steele County Water Patrol

Keep a tight line !!!!

I read somewhere this week that “many people obey the law only when there is a credible threat that they may get caught”. With the requirement for probable cause, the credible threat becomes less credible. I also find it interesting that it was a lawyer that filed the suit to prohibit normal search procedures. They can check me any time too!

If what Old Ranger says is correct, what will happen to the “TIP” program? No more annonomous tips?

One more time……….why? Don’t know.

I read the linked stories and still can’t see the “apples to apples” comparison. We have a survey, in which no one was threatened or searched, we have a repetitious offender wanted for a gun crime, and several raid incidents regarding drug enforcement. The last mention has plenty of tragedy in it so please understand, I do sympothize with those victims and see an issue with some of those practices used.

However, change point being that we’re talking about CO’s and fish. Not public health threats or illegal contraband. This change to DNR authority, while important to us and our pasttime, just doesn’t hold the degree of public severity the drugs and other serious crimes do. To not change the law……………..I ask, have innocent kids been getting killed over freezer raids all these years when they had the authority to search at will?

Apples to apples guys……………..I can’t see what we’re fussing over. The CO authority wasn’t influencing a change for other authorities, it’s the other way and a ruling has been made. Not that it fits all of our ideas regarding law enforcement or the preservation of compliance, but nonetheless, the issue being discussed doesn’t compare with the others referrenced.

There will always be incidents that upset us, on both sides of the fence, but if history is a teacher, I’m struggling to see where pinning down the authority of a CO is a major victory for either point of view.

We’re talking about having our livewell checked, not DNR conducted “SWAT raids “.

YES!!! What About the TIPS program……How Is that Affectived?…Before You Could alwaways call the “HOTLINE”…No Name If you didn’t want….NO Ju dge?

SWANY

If you think the DNR does not conduct SWAT-type raids or surveillance, come on down here deer hunting this year (if you can afford the $500 out-of-state tag price). The county where I hunt (Clayton, bordering on the river) is consistently the #1 producer of both numbers and trophies, and the DNR annually pulls CO’s from counties all across the state that are lesser known for deer hunting to come on up and help with ‘enforcement.’

Unfortunately, their idea of enforcement is randomly stopping people, road blocks, unwarranted searches, surveillance, etc. They’ll see you on stand and walk right over and shake you down, knowing that every deer in the state is now avoiding that spot like the plague.

Last year, an ATV was confiscated during first season on a property that I hunt. One of the party members took a nice buck, and went back to the truck to get the ATV while the rest of the party finished the drive. When he drove back to get the deer, the CO blocked his exit, accused him of driving deer with the ATV, and kept it. Boom, $3K for the DNR.

So long as the enforcers have incentive (i.e. ticket $$, auction of confiscated property $$), abuse will become more pervasive. The bar in Littleton used to have a bumper sticker on the wall: “DNR = Da**ed Near Russia” If abuse is so rare, then how did a saying like that get popular enough to warrant printing of bumper stickers?

As far as I’m concerned, random searches were rightly tossed into the scrap-heap of enforcement methods that have no place in a free society. Random beatings and torture are responsible for the incarceration of more “criminals” worldwide than random searches, but nobody is screaming to institute them. Perhaps our taste for bootleather just isn’t as developed as it needs to be.

FTR is not a good place to start a debate on the War on Drugs, but I can’t avoid addressing two points: 1. The WOD has killed more people than drugs ever could. 2. I would have thought when the percentage of our citizenry that is currently imprisoned surpassed Red China and Castro’s Cuba, people would have re-thought the idea of taking a war into the homes of it’s own people…

Guess not.

Gianni my friend, if you’re having that kind of a problem in your area, I’ll take your word for it. But instead of me coming down there to see how bad it is, how about you hunt with me this year and see how good it is up here? Not that we have an incident free area, most of what’s publicized is just an incident and not the norm. It’s easy for me to ask what all the fuss is when the large majority of those I fish and hunt with do not experience these problems. I only know of 2 incidents in my area over the last 23 years that involved anyone of acquaintence, one was upsetting in the actions of the CO and the other…………well, the guy WAS breaking the law. Unknowingly by his resources, but breaking the law. In neither case was anyone physically abused or “shaken down”. The stories are out there but how many of the good stories ever get reported??? By enlarge, my recreation area must have some decent people in it because the things of which you speak are not in alignment with my area’s common occurance.

Have you ever considered relocating? We’ve got plenty of room for ya up this way!

Stillakid and the rest of ya from Minn, BELIEVE what Gianni is telling you!!! This crap does definitly take place. And more often than you might think. But, you probably won’t read too many “true” stories about the goings on here in Ia. because this board is read by many. Get it????

That kind of thing is common place during the Iowa deer seasons . It is a cash cow for the DNR.You can get a ticket for walking on the road with your weapon even though it is unloaded , and if your case is not zipped up all the way it will cost you $ 145 . I know of this personally. I live in SE Iowa and would take exeption to Giannis claim of the deer mecca . We bang some real monsters down here also. When you see the airplane buzzing aroung you better be prepaired and you better be legal, because there are no warnings .

Hey guys,

If IA is that bad, how would the state feel about their “cash cow” if you all boycotted the season? What could they do? Ticket you for lack of a firearm during cash cow season? No, I wouldn’t want to give up my hunting either so I’d go somewhere else. Not the best of circumstances and REALLY inconvenient but if I was dealing with such crap every whitetail season, that’s what I’d do! Take it somewhere else and let them figure out how to fix the new problem.

There’s power in money, but equal power in the absence of it. It all boils down to what’s important to who.

Just a thought here guys… isn’t the likely answer to the nearly overwhelming presence of DNR during the IA deer season almost CERTAINLY due to rampant game law violations? I mean, cummon’ now, the big bad DNR is there in force “and nobody’s doing anything wrong?” You’re trying to pass this off as simple harrassment? You will not convince me that there’s any other reason for the DNR’s presense and attitude than that the multitude of hunters in that area, and many others, are pretty much tearing it up out there!! I mean I’ve been on party slug hunts… it was horrible! I did ONE in my lifetime… never again. (Now bowhunting, that I like!) Guys skirting the edges of the law at every opportunity…. doing the things they shouldn’t be because they’re reasonably sure they can get away with it. Lots of shooting. Lots of alcohol. Maybe you guys don’t conduct yourself that way. If not, I applaud you for it. Many do. Now put yourself in the shoes of the guy that has to go out and deal with a bunch of drunken armed hulligans from sun up to sundown and tell me your not going to take things mighty damn seriously. I mean really put yourself in his or her shoes. They have a husband or wife and children to go home to at the end of the day and their job is to basically “referree” an armed and potential dangerous group of hunters.

Why does the DNR ticket you for not having your gun case completely zipped up and unloaded when you walk a road? Because a couple of the last 10 guys they stopped with their cases partially open were road hunting and were simply dropping the unzipped case to take their shots. And after awhile it gets pretty hard to tell who was intentionally breaking that law and those that just “forgot.” And maybe a guy does get caught once in awhile completely unaware, with no intentions of breaking any law for something as simple as leaving your gun case unzipped walking a road side. But that’s the price you pay for not following the rules. Grandpa called it the “stupid tax.” Know the rules. Follow the rules. To the “T.” Or be prepard to pay the stupid tax.

I just really get all bunched up when I hear people accuse groups of people in authority with widespread abuses of power. It just doesn’t happen. Conspiracy theory my eye! You get a bad apple or two. That’s it. Deal with the bad apples. Don’t throw out the whole barrel.

YEAH….. now THATS what IM talking about…. good post… I stopped myself earlier tonight from responding…. but….
in truth when I lived in Iowa violations were rampant during deer season… I was witness to many infractions (when ever I was stupid enough to be in the field during deer season that is!)….. I saw guys chasing deer with 4wd’s and guys shooting out of the back…. hunters taking pot shots at flocks of turkeys or anything that moved… typically during drives they would shoot just as many deer as came by and worry about if there were tags to cover them later…. I saw guys open up on deer you could barely see, empty their guns and not even go check for blood (since nothing dropped they didnt care)……. there were more if I cared to try and remember them… I went during the shotgun season just once it was such a masacre I never tried it again……… also I remember there were a couple of wardens shot to death by hunters (pheasant hunters if I recall)….. considering what they are up against I dont think they are being unreasonable….. just my opinion….. enforcement needs to be able to do their job.. if they are not… well there are other ways to go about limiting harvest… and maybe then people will wish the wardens could resume the old ways……

I spend more time on the water than any man has a right to… and I fish all over heck. So I have opportunity to run into a bunch of different CO’s. So far, every one I’ve met personally has been a great guy… or gal in one instance. But then I’ve treated them with the the utmost dignity and respect at every turn.

Here’s a typical stop in my boat… Want to see my fish? Hell yeah, go right ahead. Don’t forget the front livewell. My fire extinguisher is right here. Life vest? Count ’em. Throwable? You’re leaning on it. Licenses? Here’s mine. Get ’em out for the officer fellas and hurry, he’s got more stops to make today. Thank you very much officer… can I offer you a cold soda? Oh, and by the way, thanks for stopping by and checking things out. I wish you guys had the budget to be out here more. Good to see you around today and I want you to know I appreciate you helping protect a resource I really love.

And I’m not kidding or exaggerating.

To the goofballs that have the tendency to want to tell a CO to “mind their own damn business…” when they want to check fish…. guys, I think you’re about as out of touch as anyone I’d ever care to know. You ever did that in my boat it would be the last time we’d ever fish together and on a personal level I’d have no time for you after that. It makes no sense if you care about the outdoors and frankly, it just isn’t a very christian way to treat anyone, certainly nothing I’d be proud to admit.

So it basically comes down to treating others the way you’d like to be treated. Tell a game warden to stick it when he wants to check you fish, well, don’t come whining here when you had a bad experience as a result. Treat them with respect and a smile and they’re actually a heck of a lot of fun to talk to and I personally have picked up some incredible fishing info from a couple CO’s during stops.