Post by: HntnFsh on February 14, 2016, 09:04:46 AM
Seemed odd to me that they were doing what looked like random stops on people leaving the area. Instead of just going down and checking people as they dipped. Ive been thinking about this a bit. And decide think that if I was the person they waved in. I would politely ask about the legality of the stop.
I'm not here to bash the WDFW guys. I know they have more power in certain areas than other law enforcement agencies. Mostly just curious if this is within their right? Do they have the authority to wave random vehicles in for checks. I'm sure they have complete authority to check you while your dipping etc. Or even if they watch you put your gear, or catch in your vehicle. But do they have the right to check you just because your leaving an area that is open for retention of a whatever is in season. Especially since this area is used for recreation other than fishing or smelt dipping?
HntnFsh
Post by: bigtex on February 14, 2016, 09:25:15 AM
The likely reason is they have a plainclothes officer watching people dip and telling the uniformed officers which vehicles may be over their limit and to stop them.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk
Post by: trophyhunt on February 14, 2016, 09:46:00 AM
Post by: trophyhunt on February 14, 2016, 09:47:05 AM
Fish & wildlife checkpoints are legal in WA. DUI checkpoints are illegal.that makes a lot more sense, thanks bigtex.
The likely reason is they have a plainclothes officer watching people dip and telling the uniformed officers which vehicles may be over their limit and to stop them.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk
Post by: HntnFsh on February 14, 2016, 11:08:25 AM
Post by: pd on February 14, 2016, 01:23:09 PM
Fish & wildlife checkpoints are legal in WA. DUI checkpoints are illegal.
The likely reason is they have a plainclothes officer watching people dip and telling the uniformed officers which vehicles may be over their limit and to stop them.
In this instance (plainclothes officer providing information to uniformed officers), this would not be a random checkpoint stop; rather, there is probable cause (suspected violation or crime).
Post by: Bob33 on February 14, 2016, 01:39:04 PM
Wildlife check stations or field inspections—Unlawful avoidance—Penalty.
(1) A person is guilty of unlawfully avoiding wildlife check stations or field inspections if the person fails to:
(a) Obey check station signs;
(b) Stop and report at a check station if directed to do so by a uniformed fish and wildlife officer or if directed by an ex officio fish and wildlife officer participating in a department-authorized check station; or
(c) Produce for inspection upon request by a fish and wildlife officer or ex officio fish and wildlife officer: (i) Hunting or fishing equipment; (ii) seaweed, fish, shellfish, or wildlife; or (iii) licenses, permits, tags, stamps, or catch record cards required by this title.
(2) Unlawfully avoiding wildlife check stations or field inspections is a gross misdemeanor.
(3) Wildlife check stations may not be established upon interstate highways or state routes.
Post by: buglebrush on February 14, 2016, 02:24:51 PM
Post by: brew on February 14, 2016, 02:57:49 PM
Post by: Man Tracker on February 14, 2016, 06:29:00 PM
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on February 14, 2016, 07:01:19 PM
i'm a hunter education instructor...every week long class we hold we have a local officer come in and talk with the class for a couple hours concerning game regs. every class that officer says that he has the the authority to stop anyone he suspects of hunting/fishing or even in any way suspects they MIGHT be thinking about hunting or fishing .dont know if that is accurate but his claim is they have jurisdiction to stop anyone that is commiting ANY washington law or that may THINK about commiting any violation..not gonna give his name but he says they have the most liberal jurisdiction of any law enforcement agency
KOOL!!! The thought Police!
Post by: Little Dave on February 18, 2016, 10:36:10 PM
There's probably a better way of approaching the matter of authority in a classroom setting. The way that I would like to see it is that the officer makes more of an effort to stress how he is an ally in the field rather than a jackboot to be avoided.