Too much Law Enforcement

[harvey lee]

I get checked every year numerous times both fishing and hunting and thats fine with me. I would guess I get checked a bit more as I also fish and hunt many days of the year.

CO's are spread way to thin. As far as going more to the TIP program, it works but more times than not, the person gets away before anyone can get to the scene of the crime so to speak.

As far as all the AIS inspectors, it everyone followed the rules, then we would need way less for inspectoer but like the game laws, we need them as so many laws are broken.

I would love to see more CO's but not at the expense of stocking or other needed programs. Maybe the DNR needs more funding.

[Scott K]

Quote:

As far as all the AIS inspectors, it everyone followed the rules, then we would need way less for inspectoer but like the game laws, we need them as so many laws are broken.

Quote:

Problem is with so many rules now days it's difficult to be 100% confident you're legal.

In here lies the problems. If you make a gazillion laws, and are thorough in checking everyone, everyone will be breaking the laws. Back in the day when there were just the basic laws, a regualr law abider didnt have to worry about getting a ticket. Today, even the most cautious outdoorsman if inspected long enough, almost guaranteed is breaking some law on every trip.

Kinda like 2 weeks ago, following a DNR truck up north, I had a cigarette come flying out of his window, and hit my windshield. I am sure it accidentally flew out of his hand while going down the road, because they should be smarter then to litter, and should be concerned with starting a fire with as dry as it has been.

[reinhard1]

i could be wrong Harvey but i think none of the funding for the AIS program comes from hunting and fishing sales. i think it's from boat registration fees and other sources. hunting and fishing licence fees go up next season i believe. good luck.

[Riverratpete]

Quote:

In here lies the problems. If you make a gazillion laws, and are thorough in checking everyone, everyone will be breaking the laws. Back in the day when there were just the basic laws, a regualr law abider didnt have to worry about getting a ticket

This is pretty much what I'm talking about, seems the Bar Association has gotten the legislature to make it pretty hard to be law abiding without a law degree...but we try.

[Myrt]

my simple opinion...add CO"s in any state if you need them...and legislature(s) need to go thru all the laws and rewrite any laws that may have different interpretations...and there are these in every state I am sure......make the job easier for the CO, and law abiding easier for the hunter/fisherman....

[Tom7227]

Every time you write a law, or re-write a law, a lawyer can figure out a way to challenge it. FYI former prosecutor here.

The problem with game and fish laws in my experience is that too many of them are treated as payable offenses where it is a set fine and you don't even have to appear before a judge. Other problem is that prosecutors are too darn busy dealing with drunks, hookers and thieves to have time to deal with game violations.

Finally, I bet that at least 20% of the allotted 125 are office types. Make it simple - MN has 86,943 square miles, 7,326 of which is water. So let's say that 100 of the CO's are out in the field working types (way high IMO.) Let's say that none of them sleep and area always working, and are evenly spread out across the state. That means that each CO has 869.43 square miles to cover.

What are the chances of them finding anything at all?

[mr_jman]

Unless I missed it, the fact that many of the AIS inspectors are college kids that take several training classes on how to inspect boats properly and what to look for..... Many of them are doing this as a summer internship and aren't paid a whole lot for their time.

DNR State Park Managers, Fish and Wildlife, and State Trails workers have all been trained in AIS and can inspect boats now... At least in the SW region.

Also, most of the tickets written and non-compliance for AIS was for the boat plugs not being pulled.

All inspectors understand that there may be a small amount of water in the livewell, bilge area, etc. because of the drain location being higher than the water line. Inspectors will check bait buckets, livewells, etc. BUT CO's understand if you are making attempts to follow the rules they will generally let you go without a ticket UNLESS you are acting like a jerk then it may be a different story...

[Myrt]

(Tom7727)Every time you write a law, or re-write a law, a lawyer can figure out a way to challenge it. FYI former prosecutor here.

I do not doubt that at all. But there always a few laws that really should have more clarification, or not be on the books if they are only enforceable by interpretation and not decisive language. I am sure that more CO's should be added, but law writing should be better to allow for a more efficient process.

[James_R]

I don't think most regular people or prosecutors care all too much about thimbles of water in our boats, life jacket violations or other "minor" fishing/hunting infractions. Hiring a state worker is expensive. People want to see our criminal justice system protecting victims and going after real criminals not writing tickets to sheephead murderers and people who forgot their throw cushions in the car. The more laws our government creates the more criminals we will have. I'm not sure we need an army of COs blanketing the state writing ticket after ticket for victimless infractions.

[Myrt]

Exactly....and when you hire an expensive state worker why would we make it harder to do his job by writing confusing or perhaps even some useless laws. Clean up the legislative bureaucracy and then work on the law enforcement one.

[mainbutter]

Other problem is that prosecutors are too darn busy dealing with drunks, hookers and thieves to have time to deal with game violations.

Easy way to fix that, get rid of criminal law prohibiting #1 and #2.

[James_R]

The problem is we never seem to repeal or sunset any of the laws in our criminal code so they keep piling up. State agencies routinely draft their own tailer made legislation which tends to suit their own desires for revenue, staffing or increased enforcement powers. This stuff is boring legalese and as citizens we don't spend any time scrutinizing it until we find ourselves under the thumb of an LEO or judge. We have to start being a little more skeptical of our politicians and the laws that they draft. We need more law repealers and less law makers. Of course that would result in smaller state budgets and smaller government overall so it wouldn't be too popular at our state capital.

[Comit 2]

Quote:

I do not doubt that at all. But there always a few laws that really should have more clarification, or not be on the books if they are only enforceable by interpretation and not decisive language. I am sure that more CO's should be added, but law writing should be better to allow for a more efficient process.

There was a post earlier this year that went something like.

"I read all the new laws,I have the stickers on my boat and trailer but what I don't understand is, what if I'm just leaving this lake to go to another lake. Do I still have to empty the water in my minnow bucket/live wall?"

I though he was joking!

So I say, Yes we need people at the landings to check for offenders. Not that they are trying to break the law but to help them understand the laws and why we have them. If that doesn't work maybe a fine will.

[Myrt]

Right...and I understand that law to be to dump the water....how about the disagreement on this site over whether a person may legally keep fishing for a species once their limit is reached....couldn't that law be written more to the point.....such as "once you've reached a limit of a species you may not fish for them any more that day"...or "once you've reached a limit for a species you may continue to fish for that species by catch and release only...no culling"

with all the time spent on writing these laws, spend just a little more time and use as decisive language as we can...nothing vague

I don't think the law you were referencing is vague, so maybe you'll never reach everyone to understand laws the same way....but I know it could be better...and this would be easier for both law enforcement and license holders

[Grum]

but then what would the lawyers do?