Possesion Limit morons?

I just talked to an individual who just returned from a long vacation with 240 perch in his possession. I asked him if he was aware that the possession limit for the place he returned from was 40 not 240. His response- “I can keep 20 per day, I only make the trip once a year, and I am not about to leave with only 40 perch. How can my family have a fish fry if I only bring home that few fish?”

He told me there was 10 guys total and all apparently limited out every day and kept there limit each day.
What a bunch of f… sticks. Clueless.

TIP

2 ways to look at this. 1. IF he is lieing about how many he kept, no harm. Most likely not the case. 2. They stole resources from the rest of us law abiding sportsmen, and potentially had some impact to the environment. If that is the case, then they need to be tried, convicted, and suffer the full consequences they are subgect to. If the consequences don’t match the crime, we have a responsibility to be at the hearings and have the punishment increased.

Unforgivable. TIP.

suzuki wrote:

Unforgivable. TIP.

X2

I saw some photos of the daily catch for the group before cleaning and a mess of bags of filets in the cooler so fairly certain it’s no lie. Stuff like this really irritates me.

I think a roundhouse would’ve covered it.

I hope you chewed his a$$, too many passive aggressive people who will complain elsewhere but say nothing to the perps face, not saying you are, just generalizing. Sometimes we got to be our own police.

What if he told you he just robbed a bank? He broke a major law. Up to you what to do but at the very least you should tell him what an #%#(&%*)^_ he is and if it were me break all lines of communication with him. I can see where calling the cops on someone you know could be hard to do.

Posting here really does no good.

Wisconsin DNR TIP line: 1-800-847-9367

What a POS. But I can’t agree he’s clueless. He knew he was committing a crime.

Being ignorant is one thing, but from what he said, he obviously knew he was breaking the law and he seems to think that his “special once a year trip” is justification for doing so.

Turn his perp @ss in. Every POS like this that gets his @ss burned and burned good serves as another great example for the many others who are still pulling this crap.

Grouse

Just to be clear in advance, I’m a law and order kind of a guy and follow the rules, with very, very few exceptions, to the best of my ability, conscious and knowledge. But just playing devil’s advocate here for a second, what is the difference in this guying doing what he did and the retiree that lives on the lake fishing, catching and eating day in and day out (but staying under his possession limit) to the same total number or more? If both limited themselves to their daily limits and the only issue is possession limit and how and when somebody eats what they caught, is there really an offense other than statutory? Just asking.

^^^ Forward to mille lacs lawyer, good argument to be had there.

One broke the law, one didn’t. Doesn’t matter if it is fair or if both have the same impact.

As you can tell, I’m not a big fan of possession limits as a tool for environmental conservation and protection…because they’re not. If state DNRs want to implement seasonal limits that’s one thing, which would seem to make sense from a resource perspective, but a possession limit is only a concession to the difficulty faced by law enforcement and the practicality of proving a seasonal limit violation without having to tag individual animals…and a poor attempt at that since the only time they are seemingly enforced is possibly when an individual is traveling or when they’re being stupid and talking about their violation of the law.

Again, just to be clear, I follow possession limits but certainly don’t see where they are protecting our natural resources by doing so other than by potentially limiting traveling sportsmen and women if they’re not eating their catch or kill during their travels.

Chris – playing devils advocate here also…..

Which one of the individuals that you described above is more likely to throw away freezer burned fish a year from now?

nhamm wrote:

I think a roundhouse would’ve covered it.

I hope you chewed his a$$, too many passive aggressive people who will complain elsewhere but say nothing to the perps face, not saying you are, just generalizing. Sometimes we got to be our own police.

Believe me, I chewed his butt and tipped the DNR after he left. This is the crap that gives sportsmen a bad name. This guy fishes all the time- I have talked to him before- and always keeps everything he catches. I can only imagine how much fish he has kept for the family fish fry. He was fishing in MN and lives in WI. He is not a friend just an acquaintance that knows I fish.

Joel Ballweg wrote:

Chris – playing devils advocate here also…..

Which one of the individuals that you described above is more likely to throw away freezer burned fish a year from now?

Joel–That would be hard to answer unless knowing the individuals. But, if the assumption is that the retiree always eats their fish and that freezer burn can only happen if there is freezer excess, than the obvious nod goes to the violator for no other reason than lack of opportunity for the retiree.

However, the question I’ll ask in return is that if the potential amount of freezer burned fish being throw away is less than any excessive amount above and beyond what we would consider a “reasonable” seasonal number eaten by the retiree, who’s the most egregious angler?

Please report this guy. The guy who does nothing is just as bad as the guy that broke the law.

I definitely believe that possession limits serve a purpose. If they didn’t, why does every state (and country for that matter) have them?

Because to many knuckle heads like this guy think they deserve to take unlimited quantities. In this guys case, the perpetrator thinks its “okay” because he only takes one trip a year up to this location.
Violators like this guy always have an excuse for why they deserve more than everyone else.

biggill wrote:

Please report this guy. The guy who does nothing is just as bad as the guy that broke the law.

Already done. It is people like that that have made perch worth keeping next to impossible to find in the lakes I used to find them in regularly. Remember the days of 50 perch or pannies per day in WI? I would never want to clean that many fish at a time. I don’t even keep 25.

zzXcvvbnnnnmmmm. ,..,,mbvxzHH

Attachments:

1. 

   image87.jpg
   

They do help protect the resource because the vast majority of fishermen follow the laws. Like you said, if there was a way to enforce seasonal limits they probably would. Daily possession limits are are about the best they can do.

On a side note, in Florida there is a daily limit and a possession limit of 2 days bag limit.

Chris Raymond wrote:

Just to be clear in advance, I’m a law and order kind of a guy and follow the rules, with very, very few exceptions, to the best of my ability, conscious and knowledge. But just playing devil’s advocate here for a second, what is the difference in this guying doing what he did and the retiree that lives on the lake fishing, catching and eating day in and day out (but staying under his possession limit) to the same total number or more?

The difference is that one is breaking the law and one isn’t.

There is no entitlement to keep fish based on what you feel is fair, equitable, or whatever. The law is the law, you’re either following it or you’re not.

You also have to keep in mind that this “retiree” that fishes all the time and keeps fish constantly represents a tiny fraction of the population overall. And again, you’re implying that somehow the “fairness” of this situation should factor in terms of this “retiree” getting “more than his share”. The law makes no such distinction.

Grouse

I’m pretty sure that retired strawman gets sick of fish and eats a lot of other things from the grocery store.

Typical of these guys is to show off their latest fishing expeditions. You stated he’s just an acquantice so I’m sure he shows you pics of his latest and greatest. Only way to beat these guys is with your brain so get back good in with em and next time have him forward the pics to your phone, and proceed to tell him how awesome his fish is and just feed the ego piles of BS only to forward those onto TIP.

Art Green wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>biggill wrote:</div>
Please report this guy. The guy who does nothing is just as bad as the guy that broke the law.

Already done. It is people like that that have made perch worth keeping next to impossible to find in the lakes I used to find them in regularly. Remember the days of 50 perch or pannies per day in WI? I would never want to clean that many fish at a time. I don’t even keep 25.

Thank you. I didn’t really mean that, but I really wanted him reported.

I’ve never come across anything like that but I know I’d have no problem calling tip right in front of the guy.

Chris Raymond wrote:

what is the difference in this guying doing what he did and the retiree that lives on the lake fishing, catching and eating day in and day out (but staying under his possession limit) to the same total number or more? If both limited themselves to their daily limits and the only issue is possession limit and how and when somebody eats what they caught, is there really an offense other than statutory? Just asking.

I’d be inclined to believe you’d get better compliance to a set of formal rules than “self policing” without. If everyone used the mentality of: “I’m only here for a few days or I’m only fishing this lake once or twice this year” to justify their harvest levels I would expect more instances of over harvest.

All summer long I am asked by visitors, “how many fish can I keep” and I look them in the eye and say, “it doesn’t matter… How many do you think you can eat in one meal without wasting, that’s your true limit” After a little education, most of the people I send out on their trips appear quite content with the concept of conservation; when 20 minutes earlier, they may have ended up being that guy that kept 240 fish. We cannot control what other people do with our resources, but we can do our part in enlightening those who just don’t understand. You can’t argue with stupid, but you can inform the ignorant; eventually the ignorant will begin to understand, and the stupid will get caught.

mplspug wrote:

I’m pretty sure that retired strawman gets sick of fish and eats a lot of other things from the grocery store.

uh oh, freezer burn ?

Same here Pug, a Posession limit is a two day limit of that species.