WDFW Requested Legislation: Fish and Wildlife Law Enforcement...BILL PASSED

[Curly]

a $2,000 fine for a sturgeon over 65 inches seems awfully steep (if the legal limit is 65").  What if a guy honestly measures the fish at 64-7/8" long and decides to keep it.  Then when he gets checked and the fish is then relaxed and easier to measure, the warden measures it at 65-1/16" ?  Is that discrepancy in measurement worth a $2,000 fine?  Especially when you think about all the sealions taking bites out of the bellies of the sturgeon. 

Now if someone kept a sturgeon that was 67", then I could see a fine that high.  Seems like a high price for a little mistake.  I guess that is the way it is going to be or else they shut down the fishery completely, huh? 

I'd much rather see a bounty on the sealions than these fines for sportsmen.

[bigtex]

a $2,000 fine for a sturgeon over 65 inches seems awfully steep (if the legal limit is 65").  What if a guy honestly measures the fish at 64-7/8" long and decides to keep it.  Then when he gets checked and the fish is then relaxed and easier to measure, the warden measures it at 65-1/16" ?  Is that discrepancy in measurement worth a $2,000 fine?  Especially when you think about all the sealions taking bites out of the bellies of the sturgeon.

Need to remember this is after a defendant is found guilty. This isn't a $2,000 ticket. The offender goes before a judge, if the judge agrees that the measurement is so close and goes with the defendant and finds the individual not guilty, or the prosecutor drops the case then obviously no fine is handed down.

[bigtex]

I have not yet voted but consider the NO and option... I must say that if the state cannot get convitions for the most agredious offenders like in Operation Cody then why bother with increasing the fines?

I don't suffer from the do something disease, i prefer they/we get something done right. 

Well these offenses are going before judges and what was said during the hearing is somebody may get a $100 fine for an over length sturgeon that may be worth several thousand dollars even though a judge can fine them up to $5,000. This same thing is the reason why WDFW pushed for mandatory civil fines for big game poaching years ago. People were getting a $200 fine for poaching a deer, now its at least $2,000.

[Special T]

I guess i will put it this way... I'm not sure i'm willing to use a sledgehammer across the board to solve the fact that Judges cannot seem to diferentiate between Joe sixpack that has a sturgon that is 1/4" too long and some comercial poatcher that gets slapped on the wrists.

I'm not laying this on the WDFW, or enforcement, rather the judges. If we NEED mandatory fine scheduals then we don't need the judges and fire them. I think the SYSTEM is broken, which means a bandaid like what is proposed MAY slow the bleeding but won't stop it. I'm not sure what the solution is, other than kicking the judges in the balls so that they use thier brain. 

[bigtex]

I'm not laying this on the WDFW, or enforcement, rather the judges. If we NEED mandatory fine scheduals then we don't need the judges and fire them. I think the SYSTEM is broken, which means a bandaid like what is proposed MAY slow the bleeding but won't stop it. I'm not sure what the solution is, other than kicking the judges in the balls so that they use thier brain. 

Judges and the prosecutors are at fault here.

I will say that WA is rare in the fact that for the most part we don't have mandatory minimums. Even these fines (as well as the big game fines) aren't mandatory minimum criminal fines, they're civil. In WA a misdemeanor is $0-1,000 and/or 90 days, a gross misdemeanor is $0-5,000 and/or 364 days. In many states there is no $0, there is a mandatory minimum, as an example every misdemeanor is a mandatory minimum $200. So in many states an officer can tell the offender they're looking at a minimum $X fine, in WA you cant.

[Curly]

Ok, you've convinced me now bigtex.  I think I'm in favor of the bill now.


(I'd still rather have a bounty on Sealions though).

[bigtex]

(I'd still rather have a bounty on Sealions though).

Get federal law changed first 

[bigtex]

The Senate bill passed unanimously today

The bill passed out of the House Agriculture and Natural Resource Committee today. It now goes on to a full House vote and then onto the Governor.

[bearpaw]

I agree that some of the fines seem unreasonable.

The offender goes before a judge, if the judge agrees that the measurement is so close and goes with the defendant and finds the individual not guilty, or the prosecutor drops the case then obviously no fine is handed down.

There is also a great possibility of wardens/prosecutors/judges not taking that into consideration.

[bigtex]

The bill passed out of the House today with a vote of 76-22. Those voting against were Buys, Christian, Condotta, DeBolt, Haler, Hayes, Holy, G. Hunt, Klippert, Kretz, Manweller, Orcutt, Overstreet, Parker, Schmick, Scott, Shea, Short, Smith, Taylor, Vick, and Young.

Representative Blake did an amendment to the bill, so now the bill must go back to the Senate where they will then have to pass the amendment as well. Upon the Senate passing the bill again it will then go to Inslee. The following is Blake's amendment: "(b) The department must adopt rules for permissible temporary actions that include, at a minimum, the conditions under which a person may capture or transport wildlife to a primary permitee, subpermittee, or a rehabilitation facility."

EFFECT: Requires the department of fish and wildlife to adopt rules that specify when a citizen may capture or transport animals for rehabilitation.

[lokidog]

They need to send it back again and include exclusions for transport of racoons, possums, wolves, and coyotes to rehab centers.  Just finish them off and let nature take its course.   

[Elkaholic daWg]

The bill passed out of the House today with a vote of 76-22. Those voting against were Buys, Christian, Condotta, DeBolt, Haler, Hayes, Holy, G. Hunt, Klippert, Kretz, Manweller, Orcutt, Overstreet, Parker, Schmick, Scott, Shea, Short, Smith, Taylor, Vick, and Young.

Representative Blake did an amendment to the bill, so now the bill must go back to the Senate where they will then have to pass the amendment as well. Upon the Senate passing the bill again it will then go to Inslee. The following is Blake's amendment: "(b) The department must adopt rules for permissible temporary actions that include, at a minimum, the conditions under which a person may capture or transport wildlife to a primary permitee, subpermittee, or a rehabilitation facility."

EFFECT: Requires the department of fish and wildlife to adopt rules that specify when a citizen may capture or transport animals for rehabilitation.

 Makes me wish we still had F&G and let ecology take care of the other critters.....

[bigtex]

The bill passed out of the House today with a vote of 76-22. Those voting against were Buys, Christian, Condotta, DeBolt, Haler, Hayes, Holy, G. Hunt, Klippert, Kretz, Manweller, Orcutt, Overstreet, Parker, Schmick, Scott, Shea, Short, Smith, Taylor, Vick, and Young.

Representative Blake did an amendment to the bill, so now the bill must go back to the Senate where they will then have to pass the amendment as well. Upon the Senate passing the bill again it will then go to Inslee. The following is Blake's amendment: "(b) The department must adopt rules for permissible temporary actions that include, at a minimum, the conditions under which a person may capture or transport wildlife to a primary permitee, subpermittee, or a rehabilitation facility."

EFFECT: Requires the department of fish and wildlife to adopt rules that specify when a citizen may capture or transport animals for rehabilitation.

On March 10th the Senate held another vote on this bill which would add Rep Blake's amendment.

The Senate passed the bill by a vote of 47-1 with Senator Dansel in objection.

The bill now goes to the Governor for his signature..

[YJ Guide Service]

I also don't agree with the sturgeon fine as well. I have had a warden fishing with me measure a fish one way and then have a different warden measure another way, one way was legal the other was not. Even if its up to a judge you still have to appear, spend your time, gas, lawyer etc, costs you either way even if it was a legal fish that someone thought wasnt. WDFW has enough power as it is. Until they figure stuff out at the top they don't need anymore rules to enforce, enforce what we have now.

[bigtex]

WDFW has enough power as it is. Until they figure stuff out at the top they don't need anymore rules to enforce, enforce what we have now.

It isn't a new rule. It's just a mandatory fine now. No actual rules have changed....