# Why?



## adp29934 (Dec 30, 2008)

This year seems to have blessed us with a bumper crop of yearling redfish and the possibility of an even better "keeper" season next year. But what I seem to be encountering EVERY trip recently is people keeping the little guys. Watched a dad and his son slam them yesterday with no regard for the size or the creel. Imagine teaching your son of maybe 7 or so how to be an aspiring poacher. Great life lessons here people. It is sad to think that many are fishing with this mindset of "kill as many as you can while their running". Where does that leave us? I was taught to be a "sportsman" and not a "fisherman". I believe it is more about enjoying the beauty of the pass-time while respecting the precious resource and occasionally bringing home an honest and well earned meal. Did some of us not get the memo?

-Alex


----------



## HuskyMD (May 19, 2000)

Ignorance of the regulations?


----------



## solid7 (Dec 31, 2010)

Not to insult your fishing knowledge - but I don't know you from Adam, so I have to ask the question - are you SURE that they are small redfish, and not croakers?

Here on our beaches, I wish I had a dollar for every person I run across who can't tell the difference between a croaker and a red drum...


----------



## JAM (Jul 22, 2002)

*Yearlings are Over Slot Fish*

What you are seeing is Juivinel's.. 0-17 7/8 inches is a Juivinel, Pups-18-27, Yearling 28-39, Drum 40 +..

JAM


----------



## Dr. Bubba (Nov 9, 1999)

solid7 said:


> Not to insult your fishing knowledge - but I don't know you from Adam, so I have to ask the question - are you SURE that they are small redfish, and not croakers?
> 
> Here on our beaches, I wish I had a dollar for every person I run across who can't tell the difference between a croaker and a red drum...


Yes, we are sure they are small red drum. It's been rather hard since July to put a hook in the water and NOT catch one. Every few years, particularly after a mild winter like we had this year, we see a bumper crop of first year juvenile red drum. These fish were born last summer and spend the winter in our tidal river systems. Most get eaten or are frozen to death in the process. Those that survive, make their first autumn migration a year after they were born. Hence adp's term "yearling". JAM's terminology is what most folks in VA and NC understand and use to describe different age/size classes of red drum, though.


----------



## solid7 (Dec 31, 2010)

Like I said, no offense intended... I have had guys walk down the beach when we had a good croaker run, and accuse me of keeping undersize reds. Or, I've seen them throw them back, thinking they were, again, undersize reds. Even worse, people congratulate me on the nice "whiting" that I'm catching.


----------



## AbuMike (Sep 3, 2007)

Just can't stand it...................Really????????


----------



## getoffmydoormat (Sep 14, 2012)

man, i hate when people keep undersized fish, throw them back and let them grow to be caught another when they are big and strong.


----------



## jay b (Dec 1, 2002)

Alex poaching is just poaching. Put this number in your phone for the next time you witness this happening.

1-800-237-5712 or 757-247-2200. I've got them listed under "Fish Cops" and EVERY time I see that going on I pull out the phone. It's kinda like voting (or not voting) if you don't call (or vote) then you lose your right to bee-aytch.

As far as "mistaking" them for Croakers that's pretty easy, they got spot(s) on their tales and they don't "Croak" ...


----------



## solid7 (Dec 31, 2010)

jay b said:


> As far as "mistaking" them for Croakers that's pretty easy, they got spot(s) on their tales and they don't "Croak" ...


Not all drum have spots. Many do not. But that aside, it's preaching to the choir. The types who "mistake" them do so for a number of reasons, none of which are valid...

As you said, poaching is poaching, and should never be tolerated, short of life and death situations.


----------



## Kenmefish (Apr 21, 2000)

There is one species of sea mullet that has a spot on their tail and to me looks much more like a red than a crocker does. But I do think what you saw was baby reds.


----------



## GotchaMack (Jun 16, 2004)

Anybody else out there ever wonder who in the name of God came up with the names for the different size ranges of Red Drum? JAM's names and numbers are the generally accepted rule. However, when you do your homework you will find that a year old drum has an average length of 12". Those classified by angler's as yearlings (28-39") are what really confuses me personally. A 28" red is anywhere from 3-5yrs. old and after 5 years the growth rate slows way down. In other words, we classify fish that could be 15 years old as yearlings. Just food for thought........


----------



## adp29934 (Dec 30, 2008)

jay b said:


> Alex poaching is just poaching. Put this number in your phone for the next time you witness this happening.
> 
> 1-800-237-5712 or 757-247-2200. I've got them listed under "Fish Cops" and EVERY time I see that going on I pull out the phone. It's kinda like voting (or not voting) if you don't call (or vote) then you lose your right to bee-aytch.
> 
> As far as "mistaking" them for Croakers that's pretty easy, they got spot(s) on their tales and they don't "Croak" ...


Yea, I used to have the number in my previous phone. I don't waste my time with it anymore.


----------



## George Gravier (Oct 28, 1999)

Because some people just dont care...


----------



## Airframer4Fishin (Oct 25, 2008)

jay b said:


> Alex poaching is just poaching. Put this number in your phone for the next time you witness this happening.
> 
> 1-800-237-5712 or 757-247-2200. I've got them listed under "Fish Cops" and EVERY time I see that going on I pull out the phone. It's kinda like voting (or not voting) if you don't call (or vote) then you lose your right to bee-aytch.
> 
> As far as "mistaking" them for Croakers that's pretty easy, they got spot(s) on their tales and they don't "Croak" ...



i agree if you dont call then you are only allowing it to happen. i also let people know what the size limits are. if you stand by and do nothing then the situation only just gets worse.


----------



## sand flea (Oct 24, 1999)

The poaching has gotten to epic proportions. There was clearly a massive spawn this year and small fish are showing up in places people never see them. A woman I work with told me this morning that she'd had "a fish called a puppy drum this weekend. It was delicious! Do you catch them?" I asked her where she got them; she said a friend of hers gave them to her.

"How big were they?"

She help up her hands showing about a foot. I told her that she ought to tell her friend that size isn't legal. She said he told her that the fish "come in cycles and they won't be back for another two years" which has nothing to do with this year's spawn.

You know, I'm starting to think it's not just the low salinity. We had a freakishly warm winter. Cold snaps often kill off smaller drum that stick around too long. I'm starting to think the warm winter also gave a boost to the population.


----------



## P-Town Pole Bend (Aug 12, 2012)

I fish with a guide sometimes in Swansboro, NC(near Morehead City). He said that when redfish spawn the little ones swim into the bay/sounds and live until maturity around 3 years(27-32"). After they mature they go back to the ocean to live the rest of they're lives. As adults they spawn near shore so they're young can make into the bays/sounds. I'm with everyone else about the mild winter. The little ones wouldn't survive a harsh winter!! I always wondered why you don't catch big ones anywhere except the ocean.


----------



## Oyster (Jun 28, 2000)

P-Town Pole Bend said:


> I fish with a guide sometimes in Swansboro, NC(near Morehead City). He said that when redfish spawn the little ones swim into the bay/sounds and live until maturity around 3 years(27-32"). After they mature they go back to the ocean to live the rest of they're lives. As adults they spawn near shore so they're young can make into the bays/sounds. I'm with everyone else about the mild winter. The little ones wouldn't survive a harsh winter!! I always wondered why you don't catch big ones anywhere except the ocean.


Lots of big channel bass are caught in the bay. In fact, fishing is hot for them right now right out of Cape Charles along the edge of the channel. These fish summered in the upper bay and are now migrating down and out of the bay. September is the month for catching bigguns on the bay side of the Eastern Shore. October is the month to catch the bigguns on the seaside. Chris’s Bait and tackle reported one at 59” a couple of weeks ago, caught in the bay out of Cape Charles, is that big enough for you. Give them a call today and ask Bob where the big channel bass are being caught right now. 757-331-3000


----------



## beachfishin1 (May 4, 2008)

Many people are keeping juvenile puppy drum calling them spot. Ignorance is bliss and not knowing the reg's or identification can get expensive in VA Beach. Call the fish cops.


----------



## solid7 (Dec 31, 2010)

beachfishin1 said:


> Many people are keeping juvenile puppy drum calling them spot. Ignorance is bliss and not knowing the reg's or identification can get expensive in VA Beach. Call the fish cops.


That right there is what I was talkin' about. It goes both ways. But to hammer the point home, ignorance is ignorance, not an excuse. Buying a fishing license is an acknowledgement that you will educate yourself, and remove any reasonable doubt about what you are harvesting. So when you get caught, you really cannot claim ignorance.

I believe that even if you just honestly don't know, you are willfully ignorant. I'd rather stand there with a fish on the line while I investigate, than risk a fine or penalty. Better to be sure, than to play stupid. (or affirm it)


----------



## chriscustom (Jun 17, 2006)

I just want to know did you tell them that they were too small to keep, or did you just go about your own business and then come on here and blast them. Just saying. Some people dont know the rules,YOU as a fisher person, have the responsibility of telling them.


----------



## ORF Pete (Sep 26, 2009)

If you don't "waste your time" with calling the VMRC then you've got no room to complain about this type of activity imo. You've "wasted" more time typing out this thread and your response than it would have taken to call the man. Yes, sometimes fish cops take forever to show up or don't show up at all, but calling is still the biggest aspect of you doing your part to curtail poaching. Personally I despise being a snitch, so pretty much all the people I call on get a warning to throw the fish back before I dial. If they look shady and you don't want to cause a confrontation, just warn them you saw the game warden earlier at that location checking on people and handing out tickets. Plus like chriscustom said, lots of people are ignorant as to the rules and a little warning or heads up may get them to throw the fish back.


----------



## adp29934 (Dec 30, 2008)

chriscustom said:


> I just want to know did you tell them that they were too small to keep, or did you just go about your own business and then come on here and blast them. Just saying. Some people don't know the rules,YOU as a fisher person, have the responsibility of telling them.


To be honest, I said nothing on this occasion. And you're right, many do not know the rules. A few weeks ago when I was walking to my usual post to fish a man that I passed showed me his bucket FULL of juvi reds and looked ecstatic that the fishing was so good. I held my hands up and said they must be "this big", estimating 18 inches. I was given a look of confusion. Ignorance in this situation could only be blamed. Who with knowledge of the rules would happily show their illegal catch? Nevertheless it made me angry. But I guess all one can do is to try to educate those who are ignorant and "snitch" or call on those who do know and don't care. Sometimes it is easier to whine about it than it is to do what is necessary as is in my case. I will try to keep the fruitless venting to a minimum. :redface:

-Alex


----------



## Oyster (Jun 28, 2000)

I was raised by an avid angler. Dad had a place on the Chickahominy Lake from the time I was about 10. It is a beautiful cypress, black water swamp, lake that is loaded with grinnel (bowfin, mud fish). The grinnel is a hard fighter, but considered a trash fish with no food value and we, and everyone else, always let them go. Two of the distinguishing features of the grinnel are a long dorsal fin and a false eye spot on its tail. By ’68, when in was in my later teens, I decided to start saltwater fishing. I fished a few piers here in Virginia (Harrison’s, Buckroe, VB steel pier) that summer catching mostly small spot and croakers. A guy in a tackle shop told me that if I really wanted to catch a lot of nice spot to go to the Kitty Hawk pier in late September or October. I took his advice and showed up on a nice fall night. The pier was packed and every one was having a blast catching big yellow belly spot, two at a time, as fast as they could bait their hooks. I joined in and was quickly taking my share. A while later I came up with a nice double, when I realized one of the fish was not a spot. It had a longish dorsal fin and a false eye spot on its tail. I didn’t know what it was, but was willing to bet the farm that it was some salt-water form of a grinnel. I was going to throw it back but offered it to the old lady next to me. She jumped on that thing like a duck on a june bug. There were no size or creel limits back then. Before I had filled my cooler, I caught several more and the lady was very appreciative for them all. I thought, that poor old lady is ignorant and doesn’t know what she is doing and going to try to eat those old trash fish. It was the following year before I learned she knew what she was doing, and I was the ignorant one.


----------



## George Gravier (Oct 28, 1999)

Most of these people who keep undersize fish know what they are and they know the regs, maybe a few that genuinely do not know. The people who fill up their buckets just dont give a ####, and are willing to take a chance of getting caught with no regards for the regs. geo


----------



## AL_N_VB (Apr 3, 2002)

The small ones are also considered rats.who wants to eat a rat?


----------



## NightFishinGurl (Sep 14, 2012)

Wonder if they should have a fishing license test, like they do with a driver's license - some form of "match the picture of the fish to its name" at the very least, or something identifying their size/creel limits, in order to be allowed to purchase a license. At least that would remove any excuses of ignorance. They have the whole illustrated list of game fish and limits right there on the VA DGIF website, and I keep a printed color copy with me at all times while fishing.

I've seen many cast net fishers at Lynnhaven inlet at night, they don't usually catch anything big, and just shake their nets out and move to a new spot - leaving behind flounder and such only inches long to die on the sand. The birds eat them all by morning, leaving no trace. I've never had the courage to call the authorities on them (though I don't know if it's illegal if they don't actually keep the fish?) but I will follow down behind them and throw the ones still alive back in the water. The ones that are already dead become free bait.


----------



## solid7 (Dec 31, 2010)

NightFishinGurl said:


> Wonder if they should have a fishing license test, like they do with a driver's license - some form of "match the picture of the fish to its name" at the very least, or something identifying their size/creel limits, in order to be allowed to purchase a license. At least that would remove any excuses of ignorance. They have the whole illustrated list of game fish and limits right there on the VA DGIF website, and I keep a printed color copy with me at all times while fishing.


I don't think that's necessary, nor good business. Whether you mandate a test, or publish info, the fact is, all the information is out there. Mankind didn't just start fishing, either. (if you don't know about a species, find out - ask, Google, whatever) The problem with requiring a test, is that there are administrative fees required to put together a test, and then to administer it. Test = more expensive licenses. Is it worth it, just to try to combat a poaching problem that will still exist, despite your best efforts?

The real solution to poaching is to charge insane penalties to those who ARE caught. Figuring you are only going to catch 1 out of every 100 or so, increase the fines accordingly. Then, out of the fine, take only a small percentage for enforcement, and put the rest straight back into the fishery. Get caught poaching a fish? $1000 dollar minimum fine. More for regulated or protected species. Is an undersize red worth a $1000 to you? If you answer yes, then go ahead and take it... It's a win-win situation for everyone.


----------



## JAM (Jul 22, 2002)

Well you asked for it you got it.. There now will be Accountability for the Recs in NC, something that Comms have had to deal with for years.. More Regs more restrictions, and now accountability.. JAM 

http://www.islandfreepress.org/2012...creationalFishingLicenseAreEffectiveOct1.html


----------



## adp29934 (Dec 30, 2008)

solid7 said:


> I don't think that's necessary, nor good business. Whether you mandate a test, or publish info, the fact is, all the information is out there. Mankind didn't just start fishing, either. (if you don't know about a species, find out - ask, Google, whatever) The problem with requiring a test, is that there are administrative fees required to put together a test, and then to administer it. Test = more expensive licenses. Is it worth it, just to try to combat a poaching problem that will still exist, despite your best efforts?
> 
> The real solution to poaching is to charge insane penalties to those who ARE caught. Figuring you are only going to catch 1 out of every 100 or so, increase the fines accordingly. Then, out of the fine, take only a small percentage for enforcement, and put the rest straight back into the fishery. Get caught poaching a fish? $1000 dollar minimum fine. More for regulated or protected species. Is an undersize red worth a $1000 to you? If you answer yes, then go ahead and take it... It's a win-win situation for everyone.


Amen


----------



## scorpioreno40 (Apr 22, 2012)

Here's one for you. I got this on the go-pro. I was fishing in my yak and to guys from shore caught an under size drum he put it down between the rocks, to hide it.
Then I saw the resource police walk up to them, thinking yes they will be busted.....but they only checked their licenses and didnt check their cooler and if they would of looked down they would of seen the fish. I was dissapointed in what i saw. I have called the police and again gave them info and there were no police around to respond, like in the old days when you saw them through-out the day. They are so spread out now that they are at the more busier parks.


----------



## solid7 (Dec 31, 2010)

scorpioreno40 said:


> I have called the police and again gave them info and there were no police around to respond, like in the old days when you saw them through-out the day. They are so spread out now that they are at the more busier parks.


That's why in my example, I said to base the fines on the actual percentage that you think you will catch, and extrapolate the fine amount accordingly. Make the few (who are caught) pay for the many. (who are not) If need be, make the fine even higher, to cover the cost of extra staffing. If/when the problem starts to subside, you can scale back the force, and hopefully, at that point, you will also have (thinking optimistically, here) instilled some sort of culture or ethic, to the point that you sit back on your laurels for a few years - until the situation inevitably degrades once more. Then you start all over again...

The alternative is to just say "to hell with our fishery, it can never be fished out, anyway".


----------



## NightFishinGurl (Sep 14, 2012)

solid7 said:


> I don't think that's necessary, nor good business. Whether you mandate a test, or publish info, the fact is, all the information is out there. Mankind didn't just start fishing, either. (if you don't know about a species, find out - ask, Google, whatever) The problem with requiring a test, is that there are administrative fees required to put together a test, and then to administer it. Test = more expensive licenses. Is it worth it, just to try to combat a poaching problem that will still exist, despite your best efforts?
> 
> The real solution to poaching is to charge insane penalties to those who ARE caught. Figuring you are only going to catch 1 out of every 100 or so, increase the fines accordingly. Then, out of the fine, take only a small percentage for enforcement, and put the rest straight back into the fishery. Get caught poaching a fish? $1000 dollar minimum fine. More for regulated or protected species. Is an undersize red worth a $1000 to you? If you answer yes, then go ahead and take it... It's a win-win situation for everyone.


Yeah you're right, a test would create more problems than it would solve, it was just a passing thought.

But hey, if it's true that last year's mild winter helps the drum's population boom, maybe next year they'll slack off on the min size requirements.


----------



## solid7 (Dec 31, 2010)

NightFishinGurl said:


> But hey, if it's true that last year's mild winter helps the drum's population boom, maybe next year they'll slack off on the min size requirements.


Why on earth would you want that? Consider a mild winter a gift to your fishery. Five years in a row, and maybe your request would be reasonable. But if you exceed standard growth for one year, that's hardly reason to open the floodgates... At least that's my opinion.


----------



## Dr. Bubba (Nov 9, 1999)

solid7 said:


> Why on earth would you want that? Consider a mild winter a gift to your fishery. Five years in a row, and maybe your request would be reasonable. But if you exceed standard growth for one year, that's hardly reason to open the floodgates... At least that's my opinion.


and, begs the question:

How long does it take to grow a 40 year old drum?


----------



## solid7 (Dec 31, 2010)

Dr. Bubba said:


> and, begs the question:
> 
> How long does it take to grow a 40 year old drum?


Yeah, I was prepared to write up an analytic on the effects of increased spawn offset by predation and relaxed slot limits... (and how there can potentially be an overall net loss, even though specific numbers appear to increase) but in the end, it's just easier to say it's a bad idea, and existing slots should be respected.


----------



## wdbrand (May 24, 2007)

The best education a poacher can get is standing in front of a judge with everyone of his pockets turned wrong side out. That will be a fish he'll never mis-identify again, along with the proper length.


----------



## solid7 (Dec 31, 2010)

wdbrand said:


> The best education a poacher can get is standing in front of a judge with everyone of his pockets turned wrong side out. That will be a fish he'll never mis-identify again, along with the proper length.


Damn straight.


----------



## JPChase (Jul 31, 2010)

September 19th, 2012- On this day, Solid7 and wdbrand are in agreement.

I'm now second guessing the whole 12/21/12 thing...


----------



## solid7 (Dec 31, 2010)

Hey, Warren... These fellas are accusin' us of bein' in agreement. Can you believe it?


----------



## Talapia (Apr 27, 2003)

geo said:


> Most of these people who keep undersize fish know what they are and they know the regs, maybe a few that genuinely do not know. The people who fill up their buckets just dont give a ####, and are willing to take a chance of getting caught with no regards for the regs. geo


When I first started going fishing in Ocean City, MD about a decade ago, I ran into a bluefish blitz. These were the snapper sized ones that my family likes to eat. I remember catching about 20 of them and putting them into my cooler. I found out a few weeks later that the limit was only 10 per person. I am usually up on the regs but for some reason it just never occured to me that there would be a 10 fish limit on the little snappers. Live and learn.


----------



## solid7 (Dec 31, 2010)

Talapia said:


> I am usually up on the regs but for some reason it just never occured to me that there would be a 10 fish limit on the little snappers. Live and learn.


Imagine how much more educated you would have been, had you known that it would have taken you a few months to pay off those bluefish. Just sayin'....


----------



## Cool Beans (Sep 20, 2012)

Wow. . .

I must say, I think we have enough laws on the books already and justifiable fines for those violations. I wouldn't mind seeing a few more patrols out, though. I also wouldn't mind seeing that the fishing regs are printed out along with your license and handed to you so you have a copy of them and then can't claim ignorance. Everything of importance, even pictures should be able to fit on one page.

I also got to see existing laws enforced tonight. Marine Patrol stopped a few people at the Lesnar Bridge tonight and one guy with small pups got a citation.


----------



## P-Town Pole Bend (Aug 12, 2012)

I have an idea!! Why couldn't some us responsible people be deputized to help enforce the reg's on a voluntary basis. Kind of like the official weather watchers. We could be trained on how to deal with situations and report accordingly. More eyes the better!!!!!


----------



## solid7 (Dec 31, 2010)

Cool Beans said:


> I must say, I think we have enough laws on the books already and justifiable fines for those violations.


Enough laws? When did the number of laws become an issue? Who ever said we needed more? And how do you think the fines are "justifiable" if they aren't an effective deterrent, or sufficient to employ a more sizeable enforcement effort?



Cool Beans said:


> I wouldn't mind seeing a few more patrols out, though.


Who do you propose is going to pay for that? (how well does this statement marry up with your previous)




Cool Beans said:


> I also wouldn't mind seeing that the fishing regs are printed out along with your license and handed to you so you have a copy of them and then can't claim ignorance.


That is supposed to be the major POINT of requiring fishing licenses - to educate and remove plausible deniability. The vendor that sells you your license is SUPPOSED to hand you a copy of the regs. Maybe it's different in Virginia, but I've never gotten a license, and NOT been handed a copy of current regs.

Again, when you get that license, you agree to be bound by the regulations. It's your own damn fault if you break them. Yeah, I know, it's easier to be spoonfed everything, and might require the smallest little effort to become informed... Life is hard.


----------



## Talapia (Apr 27, 2003)

solid7 said:


> Imagine how much more educated you would have been, had you known that it would have taken you a few months to pay off those bluefish. Just sayin'....


Stop trolling all the postings trying to be a tough guy... Just sayin'...


----------



## solid7 (Dec 31, 2010)

Talapia said:


> Stop trolling all the postings trying to be a tough guy... Just sayin'...


Hey, you provided your own self as an example of someone who was negligent in their responsibility to understand and obey the posted regulations. I simply pointed it out, and asked a self-evident question. No need to turn it around on me. It's a public forum, and you put it out there - I just seized on it, because it *fit the discussion*. 

I would point out that your last comment was a classic troll. (intended to derail the conversation by invoking an emotional response)


----------



## wdbrand (May 24, 2007)

Talapia said:


> When I first started going fishing in Ocean City, MD about a decade ago, I ran into a bluefish blitz. These were the snapper sized ones that my family likes to eat. I remember catching about 20 of them and putting them into my cooler. I found out a few weeks later that the limit was only 10 per person. I am usually up on the regs but for some reason it just never occured to me that there would be a 10 fish limit on the little snappers. Live and learn.


 A copy of the regulations would have prevented you from becoming a law breaker, provided you took the time to read them. As for solid being a troller, it wasn't even close to that. Only offering facts and rebuttals of some of the stuff posted isn't trolling. If trolling is answering questions, presenting facts, killing info that's incorrect, then a lot of folks would be guilty. You might look up the definition. And there's no excuse for it riding or walking in this age of information. Totally unexcusable. Ass bustin fines would cure the problem for both recs and comms.


----------



## adp29934 (Dec 30, 2008)

I totally like fishing.


----------



## Cool Beans (Sep 20, 2012)

solid7 said:


> Enough laws? When did the number of laws become an issue? Who ever said we needed more?


Sorry, I reread the thread and no increase in laws was specifically mentioned.



solid7 said:


> And how do you think the fines are "justifiable" if they aren't an effective deterrent, or sufficient to employ a more sizeable enforcement effort?


But how do you know they aren't an effective deterrent? Just because you see a couple people once in awhile keep a couple small fish doesn't mean current fines aren't effective at preventing the majority of people from thinking twice about putting that 15" drum in the cooler. . .

And other (all?) laws have penalties set at levels that reflect there severity if broken. Yes, keeping a 15" drum is poaching as is acquiring Bald Eagle eggs for a Liberty Omelet. One will land you a slap on the wrist fine, the other will land you many years in jail. With the small fines levied to recreational fisherman for keeping something of the wrong size or number, maybe the regulatory agency doesn't see it as a big deal?

I believe in Virginia all fines go into the general fund, so increased patrols don't necessarily fund themselves. Someone please correct me if I am wrong.



solid7 said:


> Who do you propose is going to pay for that? (how well does this statement marry up with your previous)


I dunno. . .I've seen 10 Marine Patrol officers in 2 boats pull over a 2 people in a small center console to check their cooler and licenses. . .Maybe, just maybe, they could put 2 of those people on ATV's and send them up down the beaches a couple times a week. . .not that I'm suggesting they're inefficient or anything 



solid7 said:


> That is supposed to be the major POINT of requiring fishing licenses - to educate and remove plausible deniability. The vendor that sells you your license is SUPPOSED to hand you a copy of the regs. Maybe it's different in Virginia, but I've never gotten a license, and NOT been handed a copy of current regs.
> 
> Again, when you get that license, you agree to be bound by the regulations. It's your own damn fault if you break them. Yeah, I know, it's easier to be spoonfed everything, and might require the smallest little effort to become informed... Life is hard.


Licenses in Virginia are a primary funding source for the VDGIF only. Size and Creel limits existed before license requirements. And I have never ever been offered a set of yearly regs when renewing. They have them and they are free, but you have to ask. Since Virginia Licenses are just printed out on an 8 1/2 x 11 page now, my suggestion of them just printing out a second page with everything you need to know on it about fishing rules would be the easiest way to get them into sportsman hands. Or hell, print them out on the BACK of the license. . .no excuses then.

And yes, I ask every year for my copy of the regs. . .even though I like being spoon-fed


----------



## solid7 (Dec 31, 2010)

Cool Beans said:


> But how do you know they aren't an effective deterrent?


Well, this post sorta gave me a clue... 




Cool Beans said:


> And other (all?) laws have penalties set at levels that reflect there severity if broken. Yes, keeping a 15" drum is poaching as is acquiring Bald Eagle eggs for a Liberty Omelet. One will land you a slap on the wrist fine, the other will land you many years in jail. With the small fines levied to recreational fisherman for keeping something of the wrong size or number, maybe the regulatory agency doesn't see it as a big deal?


We have several aquatic species here in Florida that will land you in jail, as well as landing you huge fines. (and possibly confiscation of property) It all seems arbitrary enough to me. No big deal today, big deal tomorrow. Besides, when something starts sliding over on the "conservation status" list, those fines will start increasing, anyway.




Cool Beans said:


> I dunno. . .I've seen 10 Marine Patrol officers in 2 boats pull over a 2 people in a small center console to check their cooler and licenses. . .Maybe, just maybe, they could put 2 of those people on ATV's and send them up down the beaches a couple times a week. . .not that I'm suggesting they're inefficient or anything


I can't help you with that. I work in the private sector, and my co-workers can be every bit as inefficient, if not more. We're not using any of that money to address human nature issues. 



Cool Beans said:


> Size and Creel limits existed before license requirements.


License requirements were instituted to prove that fisheries are properly being managed. Our state was issued an ultimatum by the federal government, that they either require a shoreline license for residents, or the feds would step in, and do it for them.



Cool Beans said:


> And yes, I ask every year for my copy of the regs. . .even though I like being spoon-fed


Good on you. I won't knock anyone who is responsible enough to educate themselves.


----------



## hawaii50 (Sep 21, 2012)

Been reading this post for a while and decided to finally register and chime in.. Today I Fished the incoming tide at sandbridge in the surf by the market. I caught 10 undersized reds and 6 decent blue fish, pompano and numerous kings. Towards the end something slammed my rod horizontal but got off the hook.. anyhow.. I noticed this guy slaying the pups to my right at 50 or so yards away with double hook ups at times ... what I didn't notice was he was throwing them in his bucket. As he walked passed me I kindly asked .."anything worth keeping?" He had a nervous grin on his face... I looked in his bucket and he had atleast 5 or so undersized pups... Just as I was talking to him I get a hit onmy line and its an undersized pup... he SEES me throw it back .. and I say yeah these are way too small... they're illegal to keep... He's and elder gentleman and says "I got my senior citizen card and I haven't checked the current regulations.... I'm gonna eat them anyways.. " I just shook my head and kept on fishin as he headed north toward his house on the beach..


----------



## adp29934 (Dec 30, 2008)

hawaii50 said:


> He's and elder gentleman and says "I got my senior citizen card and I haven't checked the current regulations.... I'm gonna eat them anyways.. " I just shook my head and kept on fishin as he headed north toward his house on the beach..


Like everyone else in America, he's "entitled" to those fish. Haven't checked the regs lately so I'll just keep whatever I catch. Sounds justifiable.


----------



## AbuMike (Sep 3, 2007)

adp29934 said:


> I totally like fishing.


I totally like eating fish.....


----------



## AJ35 (May 15, 2012)

I like the idea about charging insane fines. I once read a story in a Field and Stream magazine about a guy that was out doing pre-season scouting for Mule Deer season. He spotted a huge mulie and just as he settled his binoculars in, he heard a crack and the deer went down. Two men came into view, and the man that was scouting immediately jumped on his cell phone to call the law. Luckily, a warden was in the area, and he showed up within 15 minutes. The two men were surprised to see him, and the fines left them most likely in need of cardiac care. First, they received a 4K fine for poaching a mule deer out of season. And, after all of the other citations were tacked on for killing a trophy status animal and other violations, the fines piled up to, if memory serves me right, $14,000. That's one heck of an expensive Mule Deer, and I would bet my last dollar that those two won't be out poaching Mule Deer anymore, and once word traveled, nobody else was in the area either. That's all it takes, a few people getting major fines or going to the hoosegow, and the problem will probably subside. I am all for heavy fines. If I'm not sure of the size limits in an area, or, I didn't get a pamphlet, I throw everything back. To me, if you are unsure, it's the only thing to do. I don't want to contribute to the problems we are already facing with fish numbers even more, even if by accident.


----------



## P-Town Pole Bend (Aug 12, 2012)

I do like the upping of the fines for violators. I'm originally from TX and when I was 19 (35yrs ago) a friend of mine was dove hunting. He came upon a covey of quail and shot 5. Game Warden showed up and to make a long story short. He was fined $100 per quail ($500) and his gun was confiscated. I know he never ever did this again and obeys the rules to this day!!


----------



## JAM (Jul 22, 2002)

Copy of the res will do little to keep you within the Law.. They can and Will enforce Proclemations that are NOT on the REGS.. Regs are only printed a couple times a year Proclemations (sp) can come out each day if they want.. JAM


----------



## Cool Beans (Sep 20, 2012)

While I don't think life ruining fines are the answer for undersized fish being kept, if the pokey never gets out and checks they are kind of moot anyways. . .so I still say that even marginally increased patrols would be more effective than screwing over some guy once in awhile.

If people are reasonably sure a game warden will show up (ie., greater chance of getting caught), I believe they would at least think twice about trying to sneak some small fish. You could attach the death penalty to poaching fish, but if someone hasn't even seen a green shirt in years at a certain strip of beach. . .


----------



## solid7 (Dec 31, 2010)

Cool Beans said:


> While I don't think life ruining fines are the answer for undersized fish being kept, if the pokey never gets out and checks they are kind of moot anyways. . .so I still say that even marginally increased patrols would be more effective than screwing over some guy once in awhile.
> 
> If people are reasonably sure a game warden will show up (ie., greater chance of getting caught), I believe they would at least think twice about trying to sneak some small fish. You could attach the death penalty to poaching fish, but if someone hasn't even seen a green shirt in years at a certain strip of beach. . .


Why have laws at all? Blaming the enforcers for not being there often enough? How does that not make the law, the law?

What ever happened to doing the right thing, even when nobody is looking? It sounds an awful lot like you are justifying the "occasional bad behavior". Am I reading that wrong?


----------



## Cool Beans (Sep 20, 2012)

solid7 said:


> Am I reading that wrong?


Yes, very much so!

Inadequate Law Enforcement makes Laws inadequate.

I look at these regulations (and as such base my opinions on) as being here first and foremost to preserve the fisheries industry for everyone by maintaining healthy breeding populations. If that is the case, stopping the greatest number of poachers is most beneficial. So I would think then citing 1000 poachers @ $100 per fine (or whatever it is) is more beneficial than bankrupting one guy. Also, I think word would spread faster about increased GW patrols with 1000 people telling their sob story to friends/family/locals vs the one guy who has to explain to his wife and kid why little Johnny isn't going to college, lol.

Most people are pretty honest and follow the law regardless, but there will always be that percentage that only does whats right because they feel they may get caught. So, if more of those people think they are going to be stopped and checked out they are more apt to know the law and follow it. . .and hopefully curb the "occasional bad behavior". But as long as they can think "it'll never happen to me" they will continue doing what they're doing. . .

This is just my opinion, of which it is valued at only 2 cents


----------



## solid7 (Dec 31, 2010)

I hear what you are saying, but I think we could make similar arguments for any law... and I don't think we should.


----------



## dirtyhandslopez (Nov 17, 2006)

'Bout 41 years Doc
Laws aren't the problem(or lack of or too many of them) it's peoples mentalities that are.


----------



## P-Town Pole Bend (Aug 12, 2012)

I have 2 situations to this issue: 1st; A friend took me to a family members home on Knotts island. They were boiling deer ribs in the middle of June. The deer had just been killed that morning. These were very poor people who lived off their land and never thought twice about any game wardens only about providing for their family. I totally understood this!! Situation #2: A person tells his family that he is going fishing and bringing home supper. Even though he could afford to go to a local grocery and buy the fish. He decided to keep everything he caught legal or illegal just to save a buck. If your buying bait it's probably more expensive than buying fish from the store. I release most of what I catch because I just enjoy catching. Sometimes I'll give what I catch to a neighbor fisherman but more times than not I just throw them back.


----------



## Cool Beans (Sep 20, 2012)

solid7 said:


> but I think we could make similar arguments for any law... and I don't think we should.


But we can, which is kind of sad in so many ways. . .

As for poaching, there has to be better options than draconian fines or plagues of officers out and about. We will always have the status-quo, which seems to be "good enough, most of the time". . .



dirtyhandslopez said:


> Laws aren't the problem(or lack of or too many of them) it's peoples mentalities that are.


Here-here. . .


----------



## P-Town Pole Bend (Aug 12, 2012)

A lot of people think gill netters and such kill most of the juvenile fish rather than poachers. While that may be true I would hate for a poacher to kill a fish I could possibly catch legally the next year. It's kind of like the abortion issue!! Are you possibly killing my trophy fish or are you killing everyone's trophy fish??


----------

