Angler #1

Make it A Crime Against the Environment

Rate this topic

37 posts in this topic

Given all of the continued poaching, along the banks of the Cape Cod Canal and elsewhere and not just with Striped bass but with other species as well , It may well be the right right to rethink how the fines are appropriated by law enforcement that sends a different message to the judges who adjudicate the cases before them when it comes to fin fish violations. Let it begin by making all violations a CRIME against the environment and base the fines upon how the environment is effected by those who poach, take more then they should, not purchase the permits and disrespect the resource to a point where by what they are doing has an adverse affect on the very health of the resource being violated. I brought this up a few years back in an article I did and I still believe it to be something that needs to be looked at as a viable solution to some of the ongoing problem we seem to be encountering more and more every day these fish are in our area. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited) · Report post

If you take a deer you are not permitted to take there are penalties. Should be the same for illegal fish. Tags would be good too. 

Edited by ged

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 mins ago, ged said:

If you take a deer you are not permitted to take there are penalties. Should be the same for illegal fish. Tags would be good too. 

You'd think tags would be a great idea. Ma legislators just don't take fish and wildlife violations seriously. Most likely because the amount revenue they contribute the the state's economy is negligible.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will never understand the push to add more bureaucracy by adding a tag system. Just make fines really hurt and enforce the game laws. I don’t want to deal with tags and I won’t willingly give up any freedom. Expecting a government agency to fix our problems is like expecting your cat to take out the trash. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited) · Report post

The solution is not to complicate the system with something like tags.  That's a nightmare.

 

The solution is to increase the probability of getting caught to such a high percentage, and the penalty for getting caught to be so severe, that it's just not worth it.

 

If you get found with an illegal fish:

 

1. Check for warrants.

2. Check for child support.

3. Check immigration status.

 

Word of jail and/or deportation for anyone caught with an illegal fish gets around real quick.

 

For people who are totally clean other than the fish, where they really are good people who "may" have simply made a mistake, FOR THE FIRST OFFENSE, mandatory court appearance, mandatory all day cheap course "fishing law," then they go free after signing legal documentation that they understand that per the course they just took, that for a SECOND OFFENSE, the penalty is 1 day in jail for any illegal fish they harvest in the future.

 

If you're going to do it, do it right.

Edited by JoeyZac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JoeyZac said:

The solution is not to complicate the system with something like tags.  That's a nightmare.

 

The solution is to increase the probability of getting caught to such a high percentage, and the penalty for getting caught to be so severe, that it's just not worth it.

 

If you get found with an illegal fish:

 

1. Check for warrants.

2. Check for child support.

3. Check immigration status.

 

Word of jail and/or deportation for anyone caught with an illegal fish gets around real quick.

 

For people who are totally clean other than the fish, where they really are good people who "may" have simply made a mistake, FOR THE FIRST OFFENSE, mandatory court appearance, mandatory all day cheap course "fishing law," then they go free after signing legal documentation that they understand that per the course they just took, that for a SECOND OFFENSE, the penalty is 1 day in jail for any illegal fish they harvest in the future.

 

If you're going to do it, do it right.

I like this approach. Too complicated and it can become less effective. Visiting my son in Va. we decided to go trout fishing; need a fishing license, then need a trout license, need an additional stamp for GW Natl Forest and then another permit for some special reg waters... said screw it we'll just go for bass...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The point that I am attempting to make is we already have enough regulations to punish those who violate these laws, what we do not have is a court system that enforces the punishment side . By making all fin crimes a crime against the environment we increase the courts system awareness as to the importance of implementing the fines as being a detriment to the actual resource that these fin fish are swimming in and thereby also help to increase the zeal of the law enforcement side of things to perform a better job in obtaining a solution to those they catch in the act, go before the courts and are given a pat on the back and sent out to do it all over again. What do you think will be the results of opening up the commercial season by an other day or two as has been mentioned is going to do to this ongoing poaching problem that has seen an exponential  increase on unethical sportsman, who can now increase the payday no matter whom they may be. It is not only those who are fishing commercially doing damage to this resource, but the recreational fishermen as well from all over this state and many others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited) · Report post

5 hours ago, giggyfish said:

I will never understand the push to add more bureaucracy by adding a tag system. Just make fines really hurt and enforce the game laws. I don’t want to deal with tags and I won’t willingly give up any freedom. Expecting a government agency to fix our problems is like expecting your cat to take out the trash. 

so how do you enforce the game laws with/o a government agency doing it? 

 

You have a license don't you - isn't that "giving up a freedom"?

Edited by PaulS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Court cases involving fisheries violations in SE Mass and along the Canal would be heard in New Bedford, Fall River, Wareham, Falmouth, or Barnstable District Courts. Some day, pay any of them a visit and see what the daily dockets are like. Violent crime and drug offenses will ALWAYS be taken more seriously by judges and prosecutors than fisheries violations, and in the hierarchy of fisheries violations, the commercial digger caught with 5 bushels of quahogs taken from a contaminated area is going to be taken more seiously than the guy with 5 short bass. Courts don't have unlimited resources, and that's the bottom line. There aren't enough judges and courtrooms to try every case. Hell, I once had to try a District Court case in the judges' lunchroom in New Bedford. :rolleyes:  

 

And judges in Massachusetts are expressly forbidden from asking about the immigration status of any defendant. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 mins ago, Ditch Jigger said:

Courts don't have unlimited resources, and that's the bottom line.

It's fascinating how Americans expect law enforcement to do their jobs without giving them the resources to do so, or even allowing them to keep the fines they levy. We starve the IRS and then wonder why tax cheating is epidemic. We starve the SEC and wonder why Wall Street is a rigged casino. A big part of the problem is anti-government ideology like @giggyfish. But they don't present an alternative. There's no "engineering solution" like speed bumps when cops won't give speeding tickets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 mins ago, Ditch Jigger said:

Court cases involving fisheries violations in SE Mass and along the Canal would be heard in New Bedford, Fall River, Wareham, Falmouth, or Barnstable District Courts. Some day, pay any of them a visit and see what the daily dockets are like. Violent crime and drug offenses will ALWAYS be taken more seriously by judges and prosecutors than fisheries violations, and in the hierarchy of fisheries violations, the commercial digger caught with 5 bushels of quahogs taken from a contaminated area is going to be taken more seiously than the guy with 5 short bass. Courts don't have unlimited resources, and that's the bottom line. There aren't enough judges and courtrooms to try every case. Hell, I once had to try a District Court case in the judges' lunchroom in New Bedford. :rolleyes:  

 

And judges in Massachusetts are expressly forbidden from asking about the immigration status of any defendant. 

 

 

Was going to post something similar many times.  Other than fisherman, no one is going to care as the judges are dealing with rapes, murders, etc. all day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 mins ago, Ditch Jigger said:

Court cases involving fisheries violations in SE Mass and along the Canal would be heard in New Bedford, Fall River, Wareham, Falmouth, or Barnstable District Courts. Some day, pay any of them a visit and see what the daily dockets are like. Violent crime and drug offenses will ALWAYS be taken more seriously by judges and prosecutors than fisheries violations, and in the hierarchy of fisheries violations, the commercial digger caught with 5 bushels of quahogs taken from a contaminated area is going to be taken more seiously than the guy with 5 short bass. Courts don't have unlimited resources, and that's the bottom line. There aren't enough judges and courtrooms to try every case. Hell, I once had to try a District Court case in the judges' lunchroom in New Bedford. :rolleyes:  

 

And judges in Massachusetts are expressly forbidden from asking about the immigration status of any defendant. 

 

 

Not asking a defendent their immigration status is pretty foolish even if not for the benefit of the defendent to make a decision on a plea deal that may affect their immigration and or deportation status. Supreme Court case Padilla vs Kentucky has more judges asking immigration status just to CYA as a result of this ruling.  But this is whacky MA after all so no surprise judges here are going the other way, and some being arrested for it in Newton.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 mins ago, alpha baiter said:

Not asking a defendent their immigration status is pretty foolish even if not for the benefit of the defendent to make a decision on a plea deal that may affect their immigration and or deportation status. Supreme Court case Padilla vs Kentucky has more judges asking immigration status just to CYA as a result of this ruling.  But this is whacky MA after all so no surprise judges here are going the other way, and some being arrested for it in Newton.  

"I cannot ask you about your immigration status, but I must advise you that if you are not a citizen of the US, this guilty plea/admission to sufficient facts may result in your deportation from the US, denial of admission to the US, and denial of naturalized citizenship." 

 

Heard it a thousand times if I heard it once. Every plea or CWOF in every courtroom, from every judge in the Commonwealth, in both District and Superior Courts. 

 

Judges of the Trial Court of the Commonwealth are bound by the laws enacted by the General Court of the Commonwealth and signed by the governor. Including the one prohibiting them from asking defendants about their immigration status as part of the plea colloquy, which is MGL ch. 278 sec. 29D. Take it up with Beacon Hill if you want that to change. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 mins ago, gellfex said:

It's fascinating how Americans expect law enforcement to do their jobs without giving them the resources to do so, or even allowing them to keep the fines they levy. We starve the IRS and then wonder why tax cheating is epidemic. We starve the SEC and wonder why Wall Street is a rigged casino. A big part of the problem is anti-government ideology like @giggyfish. But they don't present an alternative. There's no "engineering solution" like speed bumps when cops won't give speeding tickets.

I read giggys comment and he gave a solution. He said enforce the laws on the books and make the fines hurt enough to discourage future bad behavior. You don't agree that's fine but he gave a solution.  Yours is more money. Bourne PD had a 4.4 million dollar budget last year and this year are getting a new 14 million dollar police station, so nearly 20 million spent in 2020  The IRS has a 11.5 BILLION dollar budget. How much do you propose increasing their budgets to fix our problems? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to register here in order to participate.

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.