A first today-TWRA checking my car

[txnative]

Other than to criticize his actions or to simply be contrary, I don't understand the motive in saying anything other than commenting on his fishing. The "I'm just saying" disclaimer is a poor excuse to give an uninvited/unnecessary critique someone else's actions, especially over an issue such as whether or not to comply with a search request by a law enforcement officer.


Chris Bryant

[browntrout]

I have shared this story with y'all before but it is such a good story I will share it again in case some of you missed it the first time I shared it:

Where I went to Elementary school we had a big long pee trough in the boys bathroom and I could pee further across that trough than anyone. I was the best pisser that the school had ever seen. I could piss so good that the others just quit competing with me. I sure did "piss" a bunch of people off.

Roy

[MickT]

OP did right. The way the law for wildlife works in TN is this- having fishing or hunting gear in plain sight is implied consent to determine if your are in compliance with the law. In some states, it is common practice for wildlife officers to conduct "roadblocks" to assess licenses, bag limits, proper tagging, etc. Someone probably saw his fellow fisherman pass off the fish and assumed they were doing that to be able to keep on fishing. Most WOs will not search to such lengths without a reason to be suspicious. Was it a case of a jealous fisherman? Who knows.

Think about it this way- if the OP had gotten on here complaining about some guy hauling stringers of trout to the car and returning to fishing, how many on here would chastise him for not calling TWRA on the guy?

[SAMBOLIE]

Originally Posted by browntrout

I have shared this story with y'all before but it is such a good story I will share it again in case some of you missed it the first time I shared it:

Where I went to Elementary school we had a big long pee trough in the boys bathroom and I could pee further across that trough than anyone. I was the best pisser that the school had ever seen. I could piss so good that the others just quit competing with me. I sure did "piss" a bunch of people off.

Roy

Roy, once again you did not mention that you were 19 yrs old in elementary school.

[browntrout]

Originally Posted by SAMBOLIE

Roy, once again you did not mention that you were 19 yrs old in elementary school.

18.

Roy

[TomD]

I canoed up to the shallows on Bledsoe Creek a while back and started wading when I met a group not a group I'd confront using a long net 25' feet or so it would reach almost across the creek. a couple dozen or so folks wading passing a bottle around laughing carrying on hauling gunny sacks filled with their netted fish, anything they netted went in the bags my guess for a big fish fry. I went back to the canoe and headed back down stream and called the TWRA who said unless he caught them in the act wasn't much he could do.
Whats the point? Win some lose some I guess.

[tkwalker]

Yep I called the law on tcintn ... Just so I could get three pages of opinions ... No just kidding ! ... I have mixed emotions on this subject ...

I agree with merv (the agelesssone) in a lot of aspects ... Been there and done that in 1968 during the Tet Offensive , and as most of you know I take my freedom very seriously !!! ... But I see the job of the TWRA agents as well ... Plus we are always bitching about folks hauling fish to their vehicle and then continue fishing ...

Great post and subject ... Great food for thought on what you would do in this situation ... Thanks for all the posts on this thread ...

I am going to contact my friend and Staff Member and an unofficial Legal advisor on this subject ... bd ... <'TK><

[Pookie]

Originally Posted by txnative

Other than to criticize his actions or to simply be contrary, I don't understand the motive in saying anything other than commenting on his fishing. The "I'm just saying" disclaimer is a poor excuse to give an uninvited/unnecessary critique someone else's actions, especially over an issue such as whether or not to comply with a search request by a law enforcement officer.


Chris Bryant

This thread is NOT about fishing, but about an encounter with a TWRA officer while fishing. There are no disclaimers posted here, and furthermore, when a thread is initiated on a discussion board, critique/discussion is implied to be invited. If you and I found ourself fishing the same stream and I was using trout magnets but couldn't catch a fish longer than 10", your probable response would be something along the lines of: "I used crappie magnets and never hooked anything under 10"

I'm not here to discuss legal matters with anyone, but since MickT brought it up, compliance in this instance is limited to checking license, creel, and tackle. I have already stated at least twice that I would readily produce my license, allow him to check my tackle or firearm, and produce my bag limit for inspection.

tcintn initiated this thread because he was unsure what his options were in this incident. He probably complied because he didn't think he had any other option, and he had nothing to hide anyway. Everyone here is going to act/react differently to requests by game wardens. I was there, but wasn't in his position, so I can't really say what I would have done. My point now, is the same as it was in my first response, know your rights and know the authority boundaries as well.

[aero320]

This was a great thread. About 35 years ago, a friend of mine and I were crappie fishing on Barkley Lake and got caught by the game warden with too many fish. Back then, the limit was 60 per person. The game warden issued us both citations. It just happened, that the guy I was fishing with was the brother-in-law of the judge in the next county. A phone call was made and the charges were dropped. Every time I saw that game warden at the lake he said something about that incident. On one occasion, my dad was with me when the game warden pulled up to chat. After the game warden left, my dad said "You should have just paid the ticket".

In this incident, I would have done what tcintn did although I might let the game warden know that technically he needed a warrant but as a courtesy (and since I had nothing to hide) he was welcome to look.

[Alphahawk]

I fish TWRA Lakes a lot....mostly VFW and Laurel Hill. It is not uncommon if you stay until dusk in the spring and early summer you may find a road block as you head out the gate. TWRA officers will be there and they will check your cooler and count the fish. No it does not happen everyday...but does happen a couple of times each year. But you are on TWRA property...or state property.....whatever the case may be so those rules I am sure are different if you are on the side of a public road. I have never refused a check and when I have been checked it is by TWRA officers I have personally fished with in their own boat....so they don't discriminate......LOL. I have never witnessed anyone refuse a check so I don't know what hoops are jumped through if you refuse a check...if any. Here is a link to an article that in some ways the state senator is addressing some of the issues being discussed about on this thread......but what I am dead set against is the TWRA being put under political control by the legislature. I would much rather the TWRA Commission decide how our license money be spent than the state legislature.



Regards


http://www.wate.com/story/23268272/s...-twra-overhaul

[Pookie]

Originally Posted by Alphahawk

I am dead set against is the TWRA being put under political control by the legislature. I would much rather the TWRA Commission decide how our license money be spent than the state legislature.

It's a tradeoff of sorts. If you will recall, it was Senator Jackson who caused the "right to hunt" law to be passed for Tennesseans, and it was Senator Jackson who repealed the minimum caliber for deer hunting. It was reduced from .24 to .22 centerfire. A law enforcement agency without checks and balances who polices itself, is in constant danger of becoming a rogue agency.

I'm not sure of the dangers in letting the state take over the TWRA. As is, they don't seem to answer to anyone but the commissioners, who don't actually wield any authority. Ed Carter is not elected, so he doesn't even answer to the voters.

As a licensed driver, our license fees go directly to the state Dept of Safety, who passes them along to the state general fund. All civil & criminal warrants have an officer's fee attached of 42.00, which is passed along to the city or county general fund...the agency doesn't get to keep it. My point is; what would be the harm of the state taking the TWRA over? You do realize that a great portion of their funding is derived from outside sources such as the Dept of Interior, Ducks Unlimited, Trout Unlimited, etc, don't you?

I'm the last person who would advocate growing government, but as long as it is already there, they should be accountable.

[TomD]

If his request is to look in your cooler which I think is well within his right and finds no violation mission accomplished.

Beyond that if he continues his search not having found a violation and fails to ask for your permission to expand his search he may have exceeded his authority.

If he counted the fish in the cooler and you have exceeded the limit I think he has every right to continue his search.

I do stay in Holiday Inns (when I have no options) On one occasion my wife and I stay in a Holiday Inn in Little Rock and we broke the bed when we asked for another room they said no but gave us enough telephone books to prop it up so I do believe there is justice but Lady Law has been known to be a little fickle.

[tkwalker]

Originally Posted by Alphahawk

I fish TWRA Lakes a lot....mostly VFW and Laurel Hill. It is not uncommon if you stay until dusk in the spring and early summer you may find a road block as you head out the gate. TWRA officers will be there and they will check your cooler and count the fish. No it does not happen everyday...but does happen a couple of times each year. But you are on TWRA property...or state property.....whatever the case may be so those rules I am sure are different if you are on the side of a public road. I have never refused a check and when I have been checked it is by TWRA officers I have personally fished with in their own boat....so they don't discriminate......LOL. I have never witnessed anyone refuse a check so I don't know what hoops are jumped through if you refuse a check...if any. Here is a link to an article that in some ways the state senator is addressing some of the issues being discussed about on this thread......but what I am dead set against is the TWRA being put under political control by the legislature. I would much rather the TWRA Commission decide how our license money be spent than the state legislature.



Regards


http://www.wate.com/story/23268272/s...-twra-overhaul

My point for years ... Thank God TWRA is an Agency Self maintained . and a not a political bureaucracy ... <'TK><

[tkwalker]

This provided via an attorney friend ... <'TK><

"By the way, the law is that wildlife officers have the authority to search you without a warrant if you’re in the field. This is codified at Tenn. Code Ann. § 70-6-101(b)(1) and (2). There’s not really any gray area in this one. It’s been accepted law for 60 years. They can’t search a home or residence, but they have clear-cut authority to search a boat or car.



The law essentially says that participating in the taking and possession of wildlife is a privilege allowed by statute, and if you decide to engage in that privilege, you have a duty to allow inspections and searches. In fact, part (2) of the statute says if you refuse to agree to an inspection of your boat or vehicle, it is a Class C misdemeanor and you can be fined.



It’s similar to how the DUI breathalyzer law works. When you drive a car, you legally make an “implied consent” to a breathalyzer test. If an officer asks you to submit to a breathalyzer and you refuse, you’re subject to punishment including loss of your driver’s license.



The constitutionality of the law authorizing game warden searches was upheld all the way back in the 1950s, in a pair of cases – Monroe v. State and State v. Hall. Maybe I would have decided the cases the other way if I were the judge, but the Court has ruled on it and the precedent is what it is."

[Hammy]

TK, to bad you didn't have this info few days ago. It would have put a lot to bed.

Hammy