BowFishing Country banner

1 - 20 of 32 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,835 Posts
All the man hrs of paperwork and investigating to charge a guy just $500 for all them offenses? Really? lol I can understand there needs to a penalty but how the he!! does a agency make any money like that. The guy knowingly broke the law SEVERAL times. He should be charged a heck of a lot more, equipment confiscated, community service, etc..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,329 Posts
Bet catfish are taken thousands of times each year by other means in countless ways as compared to a bow but was heck of a fish believe I would have pulled my bow to full draw!!:D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,893 Posts
Here is his FB response. Sounds like they contacted authorities their self after a youth shot it thinking it was a gar...

I do understand the severity of this situation and I apologize. In the article is claims I "ASSISTED" the taking of this monarch. we were hunting in dark waters and the youth whom shot the fish yelled he had shot a gar in the head thinking it was a 3 foot gar. He had actually shot this fish in the spine just under the dorsal fin. It severed the spine and the grapple had destroyed it organs. We took the fish in and notified the authorities because we knew it would not survive. Someone at the boat dock did an article which circulated. The agent whom wrote the article confiscated my phone, (which agents can do that if you claim to have even one picture of wildlife on it). I was charged with every picture I had every copied off the internet which included a 230" mule deer that I was charged for shooting in Farmington Missouri. I don't know if any of you have been around Farmington but there are no mule deer and there are no whitetails that are 230" either. Anyway there were 3 other youths on the boat and just before trial I was told if I beat the accusations they would take the hunting and fishing privileges away from the youth hunters in the boat. I wasn't even in the front of the boat when the said fish was shot. But I agreed to keep the young hunters from losing the rights I so loved my whole life. I do regret being involved. I have been informed that if we would have left the fish to die that we would not have been charged but I couldn't bare the thought to let such a long lived creature pass on its own. I made the decision to turn it in and now I am paying the price for it. Emotionally, financially and now publicly because the agent wants to make himself look good for all of his upper management. I apologize again for any harm this has brought to our sport and anyone else involved. My number is listed and anyone with any input is more than welcome to contact me with any concerns. Thank you for reading my side of the story and I hope you all can understand the true situation this is. Thanks, Anthony
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
161 Posts
I can certainly see how in dark water a foot down the spine of that beast could look like a gar. I think this is where the legal system fails on a frequent basis.

If his story is true, first of all he committed no crime. Second, if they truely did approach the authorities on their own the right thing to do would be to take the fish and donate it to some sort of food bank or charity that needs the meat and "sternly" reinforce the rules to the youngsters involved. No need for any charges, or threats. Finally, (of course assuming his side is true, which I have no direct reason to doubt) this situation is not what the laws are there to reinforce. The rules on the books are there for people who willfully or by willful ignorance take illegal fish. While a big flat is definitely a trophy fish for many anglers, I routinely watch people harvest dozens and dozens of fish outside the rule books and even getting our wardens to show up takes an act of god. I would much rather see the guys taking home hundreds of undersize white bass and wipers/walleye/bass slammed with the heaviest fines the book offers than guys like this hit with anything at all.

Just like every beurocratic organization they seem to miss the larger picture on almost every occassion. Like stated above, even if the warden considered this a win its a monsterous loss to the tax payers. With all the man power and hours and court time and everything else 500 bucks isnt even a sneeze in the right direction. How many true offenders were allowed to continue abusing the waters while this guy was trying to make this case?

I see no up side here. The tax payers wasted a monumental amount of money, the waterways lost a fish that was on borrowed time anyway but obviously a trophy to many, the gentleman involved if honest about the situation just became jaded to all the badges in the outdoors and if he continues to fish at all will probably either not take youth anymore or wont be as active thus losing the state more and more money.

Just a joke. No benefit at all.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
347 Posts
I have no reason not to believe him but what confuses me is how he says his phone got confiscated. Unless there is some law down there that starts dealing with the 4th amendment. Cant confiscate someone's phone cause they say they have a picture of a rabbit on it in your front yard for the crime of illegally harvesting a catfish. Need a search warrant to be doing that unless he was saying that he had pictures of them with the fish they could try to seize it and claim that evidence would be destroyed if they didn't. And actually getting charged for the muley means they must have some other evidence other than a picture of a mule deer on his phone. There is a difference between being asked about something and getting charged which some people get confused with. I have several pictures of other people's deer on my phone, doesn't provide any evidence saying that I shot those deer by having pictures on my phone. In reality I'm not involved with this and don't really know the details so I cant comment too much but those things just seem kinda weird.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,893 Posts
Because his phone was used to take pictures, I believe it immediately becomes evidence just as the boat, bows, arrows, etc. Other potential criminal acts discovered while reviewing evidence can and would be investigated. Any MDC officer seeing a picture of another animal would have to prove he was not out of state, on a high fence preserve and whatever the game animal that it was a illegal take, as well as Mule Deer in Missouri? Never seen one, not that it could not happen. A lot of weird in it but hopefully the press stops regarding bowfishers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,893 Posts
I also went out with a guide in Missouri that told us up front, if you shoot a game fish, stop reeling at the side of the boat, it is never to come aboard. He said newbies shoot several a year and according to his MDC officer they know it happens BUT, this is the legal practice. So now I follow same rule on my boat, no matter the fish or it's state of health, release in water, never over the edge of boat.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
161 Posts
I also went out with a guide in Missouri that told us up front, if you shoot a game fish, stop reeling at the side of the boat, it is never to come aboard. He said newbies shoot several a year and according to his MDC officer they know it happens BUT, this is the legal practice. So now I follow same rule on my boat, no matter the fish or it's state of health, release in water, never over the edge of boat.

Dumbest thing Ive ever heard come out of a wardens mouth. Can you imagine that being applied other places. "If you shoot an elk while deer hunting just leave it lay." "If you accidentally shoot a bald eagle while duck hunting make sure to burry it immediately" "If hunting in a congested area and you accidentally shoot the hunter next to you make sure to tie the body to something heavy"

I realise those are quite liberal extensions of that, but the point remains. Id be down at the state office pushing for that warden to have wanton waste charges asap.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,086 Posts
Here's a solution make catfish a legal species and there would be no problem follow all the limits Missouri laws are so dumb
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
462 Posts
Here is his FB response. Sounds like they contacted authorities their self after a youth shot it thinking it was a gar...

I do understand the severity of this situation and I apologize. In the article is claims I "ASSISTED" the taking of this monarch. we were hunting in dark waters and the youth whom shot the fish yelled he had shot a gar in the head thinking it was a 3 foot gar. He had actually shot this fish in the spine just under the dorsal fin. It severed the spine and the grapple had destroyed it organs. We took the fish in and notified the authorities because we knew it would not survive. Someone at the boat dock did an article which circulated. The agent whom wrote the article confiscated my phone, (which agents can do that if you claim to have even one picture of wildlife on it). I was charged with every picture I had every copied off the internet which included a 230" mule deer that I was charged for shooting in Farmington Missouri. I don't know if any of you have been around Farmington but there are no mule deer and there are no whitetails that are 230" either. Anyway there were 3 other youths on the boat and just before trial I was told if I beat the accusations they would take the hunting and fishing privileges away from the youth hunters in the boat. I wasn't even in the front of the boat when the said fish was shot. But I agreed to keep the young hunters from losing the rights I so loved my whole life. I do regret being involved. I have been informed that if we would have left the fish to die that we would not have been charged but I couldn't bare the thought to let such a long lived creature pass on its own. I made the decision to turn it in and now I am paying the price for it. Emotionally, financially and now publicly because the agent wants to make himself look good for all of his upper management. I apologize again for any harm this has brought to our sport and anyone else involved. My number is listed and anyone with any input is more than welcome to contact me with any concerns. Thank you for reading my side of the story and I hope you all can understand the true situation this is. Thanks, Anthony
I could see how anyone could mistake an 83 pound flathead for a gar......NOT!:laugh: I honestly can't remember any time I ever shot anything illegal thinking it was a legal species. His story seems "fishy" to me. "I couldn't bare [bear] the thought to let such a long[-]lived creature pass on its own." Come on! Curious the youth wasn't in the brag picture since it was technically "his fish." Why would he use it as an avatar if it wasn't his and if he felt so horrible about the unjust "passing" of this "monarch?" He could accurately assess (in the self-prescribed darkness so dark as to mistake a 83lb flathead for a gar) that the spine was severed and the organs "destroyed?" Thus making it OK to go ahead and let it hold another arrow just to make sure it was taken in so it didn't have to die alone? The instant he saw it was a gamefish he knew he should not have shot. He keeps mentioning "youths"--was it some innocent 9 year olds on their first trip or some rebellious 17 year olds who don't care about the law and just choose to shoot anything laws be damned? He clearly wants us to believe the former, but he is conveniently silent on any details. If they were very young/inexperienced, what the hell were they doing "up front" without someone knowledgeable to guide them? I don't know about Missouri, but here the guardian is responsible for any infractions caused by a youth. Can they really take the rights away from these kids? I think they can if they are over 15 and need a licence to fish. What about the other flathead? Or the two bass? If he took in the big flathead because it was a "monarch," why did he take in all the other average gamefish? He also conveniently leaves out his prior troubles breaking game laws. I guess he was just the victim then, too. He's just a poor little cog caught up in the machine, and his only crime is that he cares too much... He sounds like every criminal these days who gets caught. He tries to turn the narrative around to turn himself into a hero, saving poor, defenseless kids and fighting a corrupt government system. His grammar is poor but he throws in a few "whoms" (improperly, I might add) to try to sound like an intelligent, upright citizen. There's too many holes in his story; I don't buy it. Some of it may be true, but the truth is (I believe) he WANTED to shoot that fish and he chose to break the law to do it.

I get sick of seeing people blatantly break the laws here. I don't understand why there isn't a CO posted 24/7 below the dams. The entire KDFWR could be funded on fines from that alone. From people throwing fish on the bank and leaving them, to paddlefish worshippers who throw back any fish they snag that isn't a paddlefish, to people not following limits, etc. All because they're either too lazy to read a handful of laws or they just think they are above them. They're just taking up space that could be used by those of us that do try to follow the law.
 
1 - 20 of 32 Posts
Top