Here We Go Again!

[jdmidwest]

If you drink too much in public the charge would be "public intoxication". If it caused a fight, assault. If you are not old enough to drink, minor in possession. If you drive home after a float, DUI or DWI. If drugs are involved, drug charges apply.

If you show your boobies, Public Nudity. If someone asks you to, Solicitation.

We all know there is a problem. We all know where the problems occur. Law enforcement knows there is a problem. Forestry Service and MDC knows there is a problem. Arrest the problem and teach the problem a lesson and stop the problem with existing laws.

The problems occur on the Current River, Jack's Fork River, Upper Black River, and the Huzzah. If you are on certain sections of these rivers during the summer on Saturday afternoon and to some extent Sunday, don't take young kids or anyone that may be offended by the above behavior. If you want a peaceful family fishing trip, go during the week, float early in the morning, or float any of the other beautiful streams in Mo.

Truth be known, counties enjoy the tax revenue brought in to the motels, canoe liveries, food and liquor joints by the drunken party animals.

[bigredbirdfan]

techo stated:"I always enjoy the lack of enforcement issue discussions."

That reminds of that silly poll that was conducted a while back to make the MDC look bad. It asked a number of loaded questions such as how many times you have been checked by a conservation agent and then gave you multiple choices. But one key choice was not a choice. That being: I don't know. You don't always know you have been observed by an agent.

Oh the poll asking about how many times you were actually checked by an conservation agent over the last year. Yes I remember that poll http://ozarkanglers.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=14426. This is not exactly on topic since agents don't have authority on county law like drinking and nudity (unless they have added nude fishing in the Wildlife Code Book recently).

Move over Zogby and Rasmussen. There is a new pollster in town and his name is Chief Greybear. Why don't you start a poll?

If oberservation by anyone is so effective, Why is there a problem requiring a law??????

[Chief Grey Bear]

Might want to brush up on your vast knowitallism there bigbird, MDC agents are law enforcement officers. Meaning all laws of the state. Not just the laws in the Wildlife Code. Ask some drug dealers and users that have been busted. Or some thieves that have been caught. The list goes on.

[bigredbirdfan]

Might want to brush up on your vast knowitallism there bigbird, MDC agents are law enforcement officers. Meaning all laws of the state. Not just the laws in the Wildlife Code. Ask some drug dealers and users that have been busted. Or some thieves that have been caught. The list goes on.

So if they are so effective on enforcing existing laws why do we need a new law? Should I start calling you a nickname like Little Pochontas?

[jdmidwest]

MDC has full authority to make arrest for any law violation. Local Sheriff deputies have authority to make arrest for game violations and any law violation in most areas. MDC usually has 1 agent covering multiple counties, and they really should be concentrating on game violations, not acting as bouncers on a stream. Their numbers are so few verses the area that they have to cover in comparison to other law enforcement, hence the need for more agents.

I think that it is a better deterrent of law violation if the enforcers make their presence know. If people are aware an officer is around they tend to act properly. Case in point, people always slow down when they see a police car. If not, it usually costs them money in the form of a ticket.

The actions on the rivers are well known, the sections of the rivers where the majority of the violations occur are well known. There is no need for an undercover surveillance of the area, stand out in full uniform and write tickets to stop it.

[Al Agnew]

Jd, I agree with most of what you wrote in your last two posts. Only thing I REALLY disagree with is your advice for families to go elsewhere or during the week. Believe it or not, there are still a lot of working parents that can't take off in the middle of the week. And, it goes completely against my grain to "allocate" the most popular stretches of river (which are some of the most beautiful and fun to float) to the party idiots to the exclusion of everybody else. A certain amount of that is inevitable, in that the most popular sections will always be the most crowded on weekends, so there is no way to get the kind of quality experience that you'll get on those sections in mid-week or during the cooler weather seasons. But you shouldn't have to "give" those sections, or any others, to people who are breaking the law and making it more obnoxious than necessary for everybody that isn't doing exactly what they are.

However, I agree with your statement that VISIBLE law enforcement presence is what we need. From conservation agents that hide in the woods to catch lawbreakers instead of being obvious and DISCOURAGING law breaking, to sheriffs' departments that close down a problem access instead of simply showing up at it at 11 PM on Saturday nights and arresting everybody that's causing the problems, to county commissioners and legislators that want to pass more laws instead of allocating the funds to allow law enforcement to put in more time and manpower enforcing existing laws, seems like we're always doing things bassackwards, as my grandpappy used to say.

[Chief Grey Bear]

So if they are so effective on enforcing existing laws why do we need a new law? Should I start calling you a nickname like Little Pochontas?

You know, you are right. I had another post in this spot that was not appropriate, so I deleted it. I shouldn't pick on you like I do. I know you can't help the way you are, its just how it is. I will from now on, try my best to not expose you lack of knowledge and/or inexperience.

I fully understand that no one will be completely versed in every subject. That is why we have a place, such as Phil created here, to go to and to share and learn. I should not use this opportunity to take advantage of you and your want to seem knowledgeable in all subjects.

[Chief Grey Bear]

MDC usually has 1 agent covering multiple counties, and they really should be concentrating on game violations, not acting as bouncers on a stream.

There are 164 agents to cover 114 counties. With a minimum of 1 agent per county.

And you are right, they shouldn't have to act as bouncers on a stream. And they wouldn't have to if people could act responsibly. As the Hiway Patrol shouldn't have to issue DWI's on our hiways.

[soggyfeet]

Heres an idea maybe the renting outfits could charge a excessive beer charge. Any more than a sixpack per person a buck a beer. If you take out the beer in this equasion you will get rid of the rest of the problems. I think it would be great if it would work the outfitters get more money, less drunks, less boobs(honestly I kind of liked that part). I know it would never work but I just thought I would help come up with ideas instead of yacking about the problem.

[jdmidwest]

If canoe rentals were responsible for the actions of their customers, like bar owners, would that curb the problems? If they allow an underage kid in a boat with booze, or if they let someone in their boat with excessive booze, impose a fine on them.

Since most are between the ages of 18 - 25, I noticed nobody is blaming the parents for raising kids to display this type of behaviour. Its the poor little jello shots and beads we prosecute.