fishing without license in north carolina, what kind of violation

[aczlan]

A bit of devil's advocate. What the LEO heard was an admission of guilt. They admitted that they knew what they were doing was illegal, yet they did it anyway and were "discussing their getaway" as he walked up.

If the only one who had possession of a pole with a hook on it when she said "we will be back when we have licenses" was the son with a valid license how could that be an admission of guilt?
As I understand it, there were 2 poles out when the officer showed up. One which belonged to the son with a license (but was being held by the mother) and one which the son without a license was using which DID NOT have a hook on it.
I can see the ticket for the mother as she was indeed fishing without a license, but a "fishing without a license" ticket for the son who didn't have a hook on his line? What is he going to do, use the sinker on the line to club a fish?

Question about the father - was there any fishing equipment in that vehicle with him? If so, I can see how the LEO would pursue that. If not, that does seem to be stretching.

Would be a stretch at best. It is not illegal to have a fishing pole in the car without also having a license as long as you aren't fishing with it.

Aaron Z

 

[TripleR]

I am somewhat reluctant to even post on this. It is unfortunate that the people who received the citations cannot or understandably choose not to spend the time and money to appear in court. While the citation begins the process, a person is not guilty of anything until they admit it in front of a judge or by paying the fine.

I have been in court many times when something like this came up and upon a presentation of an explanation by the defendant, the case was dismissed with or without payment of court costs.

Anyone who has worked in law enforcement has "heard it all" and simply doesn't want to or doesn't have the time to determine guilt or innocence on the side of the road, lake/stream or in the woods. New Officers have yet to fully develop a BS detector and may very well issue more citations and use "Officer Discretion" less than a more seasoned Officer.

Not having a hook can be argued both ways as we have all been fishing and changed lures/hooks etc., but were still "in the process" of fishing. This is where it is advantageous to be able to present both sides to the Court.

There are very few who manage to get through life without breaking laws in one manner or the other, sometimes without our knowledge or intent and sometimes even with it in the hopes we just don't get caught.

At the very least as has been suggested, I would write to the Prosecuting Attorney and Judge; can't hurt.

 

[scott_vt]

the son up there ALREADY had his license. the friend took a reel from the truck, with no fly or hook on it, and just practiced casting it a few times.... just a leader and sinker on it. the son with the license actually put a fly with hook on his pole and cast in. the father stayed at the truck playing with his digital camera, as did the mom... son with the license wanted to get something out of his bag and asked the mom to hold the pole ( bad idea.. no license.. holding pole in water ).. anyway at that moment the game officer literally walks out from behind the bushes and checks eveybodies license status. the mom got the ticket for the pole in the water.. the son with license was ok. the leo argued for 30m trying to give the dad in the truck a ticket even though he was no where near the water or a pole. and the friend with the hookless line in the water got a ticket.

the leo was a young guy and as i hear it.. a pretty hard .. um.. 'but' . the ticket infraction box checked for the friend states fishing with line and hook with no license. I personally don't see how that fits.. as his line had no hook. sounds like a technicality to me. the mom.. well.. bad timing...and bad decision to hold the pole. IMHO, the leo could have been a lil more understanding since he was obviously watching them from a few yards away, hidden, and heard the mom and dad telling the boys they would be back inthe morning to fish when they all had a license and to quit waisting time / daylight.

i don't mind law enforcement.. but I think a lil discretion was needed here...

I know my friends and I believe 1010% of the story as it was told to me. so far, 'mom' made a bad decision to hold the line and was technically breaking the law. 'frien'd, however, as it looks on paper, should not have been cited IMHO...

and dad? why was the leo drumming up a charge when it was clear he was watching them and knew the facts. why lie?

seems unscrupulous.

Good Afternoon Chris,
Sounds like an over zealous officer, and a desire to bring in some revenue from out of staters ! JMO !

 

[MossRoad]

ggod point.

oh yeah.. that's the other half of the ticket. 35$ or something fishing with no licens, then some court cost, then another ticket for no trout stamp....

Yeah, trout stamp is extra. i have a lifetime Indiana fishing license with a "comprehensive" endorsement that covers all species.

But I always wondered, how would they know you were fishing for trout? I mean, around here at least, there is no way to prove you were fishing for trout as there are so many other species in the waters. I would claim fishing for small mouth bass, or creek chubs or catfish, etc... something other than trout. And I think you have to be in posession of a trout to be guilty of trout fishing. I mean, lets say you are fishing for bluegill with a fly rod and popper and a trout takes the popper? You have to bring it in and immediately release it if you don't have a trout stamp. But as long as you aren't specifically targetting trout and accidentally catch one, you can't be held accountable for the fish taking your bait if you immediately release it. Maybe someone in the group mentioned the word "trout" when talking to the LEO and that was good enough for another fine.

 

[aczlan]

Not having a hook can be argued both ways as we have all been fishing and changed lures/hooks etc., but were still "in the process" of fishing. This is where it is advantageous to be able to present both sides to the Court

Now that you put it that way, I agree. It would depend on the context. For example:
No hook and standing next to a open tacklebox? Probably fishing.
No hook, line in the water with just a leader and weight and standing next to an open tacklebox? More than likely fishing and checking the reel.
No hook, line in the water with just a leader and weight, tacklebox closed? Might be fishing, might not.
No hook, line in the water with just a leader and weight, tacklebox closed and in the truck? Probably not fishing.

Aaron Z

 

[dmccarty]

her 17yr old sun has nbeen staying a few weeks up north with a friend. my friends drove up to retrieve their son, and took one of his friends with them for the trip. the got there sunday afternoon, and were going to leave monday afternoon. they were goin gto buy the 1 day fishing licenses and all go fly fishing.

the son up there ALREADY had his license. the friend took a reel from the truck, with no fly or hook on it, and just practiced casting it a few times.... just a leader and sinker on it. the son with the license actually put a fly with hook on his pole and cast in. the father stayed at the truck playing with his digital camera, as did the mom... son with the license wanted to get something out of his bag and asked the mom to hold the pole ( bad idea.. no license.. holding pole in water ).. anyway at that moment the game officer literally walks out from behind the bushes and checks eveybodies license status. the mom got the ticket for the pole in the water.. the son with license was ok. the leo argued for 30m trying to give the dad in the truck a ticket even though he was no where near the water or a pole. and the friend with the hookless line in the water got a ticket.

the leo was a young guy and as i hear it.. a pretty hard .. um.. 'but' . the ticket infraction box checked for the friend states fishing with line and hook with no license. I personally don't see how that fits.. as his line had no hook. sounds like a technicality to me. the mom.. well.. bad timing...and bad decision to hold the pole. IMHO, the leo could have been a lil more understanding since he was obviously watching them from a few yards away, hidden, and heard the mom and dad telling the boys they would be back in the morning to fish when they all had a license and to quit waisting time / daylight.
and dad? why was the leo drumming up a charge when it was clear he was watching them and knew the facts. why lie?

seems unscrupulous.

Not sure the LEO was lying. Case and statue may allow the charge regardless of a hook being on the line.

The LEO heard the mom and dad tell the kids they did not have a license. They knew they were in violation but did it anyway. Ooops.

Not sure I am buying the story that she was not fishing. They were fly fishing. Why did she need to hold the rod? I never let my fly sit on the water very long. If the son needed something from the truck he could have simply put the rod down or just handed it to her. In any case she earned the ticket.

I am VERY surprised this is a misdemeanor in NC as well as the court costs.

The wild life officers I have worked with would most likely have not written up the friend with no hook. Maybe. If the friend was 16 or younger I doubt they would have written it up. Fishing violations I have seen were written as warning for families with kids. Adults would get the citation. But it does depend on the wording of the law, court cases, and maybe how the chain of command wants things done.

You never know what a Judge will do but the Judge MIGHT dismiss the case if she and the friend show up with a fishing license. MAYBE. The Judges are often just wanting to make sure that the license has been bought. If one has the license the case might get dismissed. Because it is a misdemeanor I would do what I could to get the charge dismissed. Phone calls to the court might give a clue on how to handle this other wise I would get a lawyer because of the misdemeanor.

Later,
Dan

 

[Soundguy]

no trout, they had in fact caught no fish. the only person 'fishing' realy, was the son with the license.

and yes.. I have heard they can confiscate personal property.

the 'mom' was technically breaking the law holding the line.

bad decision.

IMHO.. they were trying to get organized to do the right thing.. just didn't work out fast enough.. again.. i think discression could have been exercised here...

A bit of devil's advocate. What the LEO heard was an admission of guilt. They admitted that they knew what they were doing was illegal, yet they did it anyway and were "discussing their getaway" as he walked up.



This seems to imply that they had possession of a trout. so, they weren't just "getting a line wet", they were in possession of illegal fish.

Question about the father - was there any fishing equipment in that vehicle with him? If so, I can see how the LEO would pursue that. If not, that does seem to be stretching.

Here in VA, they just nabbed two people with a cooler (or two) that had 49 striper/rockfish. The legal limit is 2 per person per day. Oh yea, 47 were smaller than the legally allowed minimum size. I also heard they didn't have a fishing license. They caught these guys after they stopped fishing, boarded the ferry and crossed the river. This happened last weekend and I've not heard any more about it. I'm sort of curious how this is going to go. How do they know who caught what? Maybe each of them says "I caught the two that were of legal size, the other guy caught the 47 small ones". That's somewhat of a parallel to your story. Do they figure out who did what, or treat the group as one and charge everyone?

I've heard rumors that they can confiscate your equipment, up to and including boats/vehicles, involved in illegal fishing.

Keith

 

[Soundguy]

i've known mom for 3 decades.. went to school with her.

Not a lie in her that I've ever found, so I have to say that I believe the story as she presented it.

Past that.. she WAS holding a rod with line in the water with a hook on it.. so by all means.. she was 'fishing' but it was a bad timing / event issue.. The other kid was practicing casting with a fly rod, reeling in, re-casting.. no hook or fly .. just a leader with sinker.

dad wasn't near the bank at all.. was at the mini van tinkering with a digital cam. Had to email her on the tackle box issue.

no tackle box out. it was in the van. no bucket or stringer for fish out either. just that one hook / line the water that got handed off to the non license holder 1.5 seconds before officer unfriendly swoops in for the kill.


Since it is a misd. offense.. which IMHO is pretty serious.. I'd think there would be more discression given in a situation that ocured. it's obvious the officer was setting int he bushes watching for some time. a misd' can get some people fired / not hired... like I said.. she's distraught about this... I told her to call to see if writing in will help.

I get the idea that she is not able to go back up there to go to court. either due to a work constraint or financial constraint.. or both.

as was pointed out there are grey areas all over life that one may transition thru a 'illegal act' in between 2 legal acts for a second or so.. in some cases.. it's a fuzzy line too. there are also situations that just happen to you.. that by the letter of the law, would defactor make you in violation of the law.. yet circumstances prove it out.
for instance.. many years back I helped clean out the house of my deceased FIL he was a jewlry and watch maker. old style. he had all the metal working tools and chemicals. one such bottle of chemicals he had was picric acid. years ago it was used to color and etch metals. it also at some point in it's history was used to make explosives and fireworks. mainstream use of picric acid by individuals pretty much fell out of existance.. anyway, after cleaning up his palce, I ended up with a small box of chemicals that I didn't know what they were ( they were marked.. I just didn't think it was a good idea to drop down the drain ).. this all happend on a week that was a 'amnesty' day at out local solid waste dept. they accepted paints, solvents, household chemicals.. poisons.. etc. I figured I'd do my part as a good citizen and instead of dump this stuff down the drain.. or toss int he trash I'd do exactly what the solid waste was asking.. and bring it in... did so.. you had to sign in and leave a tel #.. I get home after leaving the dump.. my mom calls me and says I'm on the news.. they have my DL picture on all the local news channels, and hte story headline was ' man leaves bomb at landfill' they evacuated a 1m area, closed roads and businesses. about that time i noticed my tel answering machine was FULL.. then news channels started calling.. beeping in on call waiting. then finally the landfill calls, during this, the police call.. 2 law enforcement agencies ended up calling me. the bomb squad and sheriffs dept. asked me a ton of questions.. my basic reply was that I thought I was doing the legal thing turning it in on amnesty day.. etc.. lots of angry people.. lots of them gave me a hard time... I reminded them that their sign at the SWD did not specify any chemicals that they would not accept. police gave me a hard time about 'bomb' issues.. etc. in the end.. Not much happened .. to me anyway. I kept maintaining my factual reount of the events.. and that I did not see where I was breaking any law.. The next amnesty day they added a line to the list and said no explosives were accepted.. so I guess I left my mark.

thru this all.. they kept telling me how much danger I was in.. how bad this stuff was.

fire dept hazmat team added a gelling agent.. robot moved it to the concrete contaiment vessle.. they roaded it to the bomb range.. closed all the roads too!

when it got there.. they had a police sniper shoot it to detonate it. .. live tv. nada.. nothing but made a hole in the plastic 5g bucket they put it in with the gell agent. then the robot put det cord all over it and then they popped it. it made a lil puff like throwing a handfull of flour in the air.. that's it..

now.. in this ( true) example.. apparrently at some point I may have been in possession of some sort of explosive or bomb making stuff I guess. (without my knowledge that I was doing so ) it's a good thing that wildlife officer in NC was not an ATF agent watching me in the bushes at my FIL's house and then folloing me to the dump to arrest me for having a bomb.. cuz that's about the same deal..

Not sure the LEO was lying. Case and statue may allow the charge regardless of a hook being on the line.

The LEO heard the mom and dad tell the kids they did not have a license. They knew they were in violation but did it anyway. Ooops.

Not sure I am buying the story that she was not fishing. They were fly fishing. Why did she need to hold the rod? I never let my fly sit on the water very long. If the son needed something from the truck he could have simply put the rod down or just handed it to her. In any case she earned the ticket.

I am VERY surprised this is a misdemeanor in NC as well as the court costs.

The wild life officers I have worked with would most likely have not written up the friend with no hook. Maybe. If the friend was 16 or younger I doubt they would have written it up. Fishing violations I have seen were written as warning for families with kids. Adults would get the citation. But it does depend on the wording of the law, court cases, and maybe how the chain of command wants things done.

You never know what a Judge will do but the Judge MIGHT dismiss the case if she and the friend show up with a fishing license. MAYBE. The Judges are often just wanting to make sure that the license has been bought. If one has the license the case might get dismissed. Because it is a misdemeanor I would do what I could to get the charge dismissed. Phone calls to the court might give a clue on how to handle this other wise I would get a lawyer because of the misdemeanor.

Later,
Dan

 

[jlawso21]

ASSUMING that you believe all of the explanation given by the original poster; this is a good example why people do not trust law enforcement officers.

I know, I know, she is technically guilty of breaking the law. But any law enforcement officer who would hide in the bushes and listen to that conversation and then issue a ticket is a sorry excuse for a human being and has absolutely no common sense. Many local and state governments are so desperate for money that they lose all sense of fairness and perspective.

People are getting tired of this kind of crap, and sooner or later they rebel against it.

Just my $.02 worth

 

[Soundguy]

I believe her. not-just- because I've known her for 30 ys.. but because I HAVE known her for 30ys.. and know what kind of a person she is.

she's guilty all right.. guilty of making a bad decision grabbing that pole. what mom won't help her kid out by holding something. she may have even done it without thinking about the legal consequences. she wasn't actually casting and reeling.. but literally holding it.. ( I know.. I know.. meets the definition on the lil piece of pink paper that specifically stated hook on line in water )

there are other places that do this sort of thing with agressive traffic (revenue) enforcement. it would seem if they are going to be so rabid about this level of enforcement that they should drop it to a civil penalty penal code violation like a traffic ticket. a class 3 misd' really? it has to be that bad?