Gigging Bust

[Old plug]

The churches charge and some make s big noise about it. It is not about doing it. It is about the strict and even handed administration of the law. This is the only thing I have a concern about. I do not have contact with them after my wife experience. I think they render a valuable service.

I am not about to name the churches or the organization that received wild fish from members are big crappie tournament. It looks wrong as i read the law. Nobody here has shown me other wise at this point.

 

[Al Agnew]

Aw, we've discussed this on here plenty of times before.  I support MDC in most of the areas of their responsibility, and I even think they do a decent job overall in enforcement, given the number of agents and the number of responsibilites they have.  However, I do question their philosophy of enforcement sometimes.  In something like 50 years, I've been checked, as near as I can remember it, 4 times.  Twice, the agent was actually out on the water (or in one case, he had to wade through a few hundred yards of brambles and then cross the creek in his shiny shoes to get to where he could holler at me to come out of the water and show him my license, and then he saw who I was and said not to bother, "If I'd known it was you I'd have saved myself a lot of trouble".).

But MOST of the agents don't know me, so it's not like I would automatically be immune to checking.

In meetings with the enforcement people, they have continually told us that we don't realize how often they are watching us, and don't bother to check us because we aren't doing anything illegal.  I understand that, but in many ways it's counterproductive.  If your goal is to make arrests and write tickets, it's a great strategy.  If the goal is to keep rule breaking from happening in the first place (which I believe should be the case for the most part), it's not nearly as effective as having a visible presence.  If hardly any anglers ever see the agents around, and only hear of infrequent busts, why would they NOT think that the agents are hardly ever around?  And since the agents can't be in very many places, those who would purposely break the rules feel like it's extremely unlikely that they would get caught.  And they seldom are, even with the agents doing their covert thing.  Visibility is important as a discouragement, and if the agent is frequently seen on the lake or river, the bad people are likely to be a lot more afraid he's going to show up at the "wrong" time and they think twice about breaking the rules.

[Chief Grey Bear]

I don't necessarily disagree with that. 

I do think the goal is to educate and in a lot of situations a warning is given. But I have no factual basis to base that on. 

Its a tough call. I can see it both ways. And I think both ways can work effectively. 

Poachers are going to poach. It's a sad fact. And to some, tickets mean nothing. 

[Old plug]

On November 26, 2015 at 9:02:02 AM, MOPanfisher said:

There are some who no matter what will point out that MDC sucks, others who will go an extra step maybe than deserved to support them (myself included), working for the government I have a better appreciation of what it takes to get say a work order acted upon, or if you write a ticket you get put down in the same resturant, sometime the same table for harassing good folks and for not writing tickets to all them other SOBs.  As for church fish fries using wild caught fish, they can be done if a fee is not charged as in donation only as I understand it.  But do you really want MDC enforcement personnel going to every church fish fry and writing tickets.  I talk to people around Pomme and hear about never seeing an agent or being checked, yet I have been checked while fishing there a couple times, maybe I just look guilty.  Take the number of people around and on Pomme and compare it to LOZ, what percentage of people can be checked, keeping in mind that if they don't send an agent ot to to the Niangua then they are gonna hear about that.

MOPANFISHER  ----- I looked the statute up myself.  Wildlife Code CSR 10-4.145 Preparing and serving. That tells it in detail. I do not care where they show up and give tickets but if they are going to enforce law do it. If the statute is wrong or unfair then change it or enforce it. To not enforce it is to me a is nothing more than a compromising what the whole code stands for.

[MOPanfisher]

AL I don't disagree with what you said either, I wish the Agents would make more personal contacts.  Old Plug I don't agree with groups whether churches or a benefit for muscular dystrophy utilizing wild caught fish to raise money, our church bought a lot of catfish over the years for fundraising events.  I fully realize that it happens a lot and that it simply isn't the hill MDC wants to make a  stand on.  I can just imagine the uproar even on this board that would arise if a couple of agents decended on a benefit fundraising for a family who lost their child in an accident and started checking to see where the fish came from and issued a few tickets.   "Why the heck aren't they out busting giggers instead of harassing good folks trying to help a family".  I also don't see it as undermining the whole code either.  If someone wants to donate their legally posessed crappie, catfish, walleye etc. to the cause I have no issue with it personally.  There are many things in the Wildlife Code for which warning whether verbal or written are given, its officer discretion on whether or not the offense deserves a ticket and I prefer it that way.   

[Old plug]

Like I say I do not care if they do it. Just amend the code to allow it. I get military about that type thing. 

[MOPanfisher]

Old Plugwith my employer I fully understand the military outlook.  However I know there is a vast difference in how laws are enforced on a military installation and the rest of the world.  On say Ft. Leavenworth 20 mph means 20 mph not 25, in the real world that doesn't have an MP every 500 yards it simply doesn't work.  I fully agree on changing the code to clear it up or allow it under certain circumstances, including adding armadillos to the "no closed season" listing with starlings and house sparrows.  But that takes time to get through the various hoops, hopefully with the next round of changes it will happen, but I won't hold my breath.  The code will never be perfect by any means but there are some things that could easily be refined.

[fishinwrench]

 

Quote

 If someone wants to donate their legally posessed crappie, catfish, walleye etc. to the cause I have no issue with it personally

I kinda do, because around here we have these guys/gals (and it seems there is one in every cove) that get off on supplying fish to everyone they know.   The barter system is a big thing among locals here and I think that is great UNTIL they start using our fish to benefit from it.   We have possession limits for a reason.   Some of these folks are pretty lethal with a rod in their hand, and whether they are getting cash or trading for other things the result is the same.  

[Chief Grey Bear]

Not many lake fisherman actually follow the "possession" limit. 

There are a lot of daily limits of crappie, catfish, and such in freezers right now. 

My problem is religious organizations already enjoy and abuse the tax free status. And they still want more money. 

[MOPanfisher]

I know guys who do the same thing with deer.  I know guys who I wouldn't even venture a guess how many crappie they catch  and seldom keep them, they as you mention essentially barter them for garden produce or whatever.  I have given many a fillet away to ladies from church, friends who don't fish etc. we all have.  I have a buddy in a.wheelchair right now if I take him fish and keep him supplied (like he did when I was down for a while)I wont lose any sleep over it  wish i had the time and skills to supply him some right now honestly.  However I know the type of person you are talking about limit a day (sometimes 2) and are willing to barter them like currency.