Ok Guys (and Gals),

I hope this comes across as an intelligent and non-aggressive discussion of some of the points being brought up here. I am not targeting any individual, only responding to comments in this thread.

Preface - along with all the other things that I stated I'm not, some one made the statement - 'You are a game cop' or something like that. I'm not sure if that statement was tendered in the impersonal or personal sense. Just to clarify, I'm not a game enforcement officer, I don't work for any government agency, even by contract. I'm just a tired old hacker who likes to fish.

I don't know, I guess I'm getting old enough that I'm a little slow. It took me a while to make the connections on some of responses.

I'll also admit that some of you have me at a disadvantage.

The two most important ones are -

(1) I only fly fish.

I don't share this to say that my way is better than your way, or that I'm superior or anything of the like. In my opinion you can fish any way you like as long as it's legal. I just (perhaps) fish using a different technique and that's it.

I share it because I don't understand the fishing techniques for using bait, or gear, etc. The last time I had a gear rod in my hand was a 51/2 ft. ultralight rig for trout about 9 years ago. So I don't know how many eggs it takes to adequately fish for steelhead using them. You would have to educate me on this, perhaps a film canister or canisters wouldn't hold enough eggs to make it worth while to attempt to circumvent the rules by storing eggs there.

Because I only fly fish, it's very seldom that I would in the course of an ordinary days fishing for me, cross into an area where its different regulations would affect me. Such as a guy bait fishing moving into an area where bait is not permitted. I wasn't being cognitive of this while I was writing my last post here. So while it would be extremely difficult for me to be searched, (ie. vest, fly boxes, raft, pontoon boat, etc.) and have a fish and wildlife officer find anything out of order, my example about finding eggs in a film canister was quite narrow in making the assumption that just because you had eggs on you in a no bait area, necessarily meant that you were guilty of a wrongdoing. This covers all the other aspects of gear and different regulations as well.

2) I don't use drugs. (or smoke, or drink excessively or chase other women or party or ... , shucks, looking at this way I have a pretty boring life.)

So I'll admit that I didn't understand the significance of using a film canister analogy. Todd really threw me for a while with his reference to pot until I did a search and found way back in the archives the story of the search, the film canister and the pot.


That being said, I still stick to my assertation I made in my last response on this thread -

Most of the various complaints that I see concerning searches seem to distill into one of two basics groupings, equipment damage and loss of privacy.

Equipment damage, during an inspection, in my opinion is pretty much a moot point. It would be really bad to have it happen. It is quite rare for it to happen, and in the event it did happen there are mechanisms in place to deal with it, and most of us don't seem to be as worried about it as we are about the loss of privacy.

Now this is where I think we are into the crux of this whole issue. Our (perceived?) loss of privacy in being searched while fishing.

As I stated above, I don't do a lot of things, so it never occured to me that I should be sensitive about having someone inspect/search myself or my equipment while fishing with concern for what they might discover.

I'll probably draw a lot of heat for this, but I'm going to say it anyway. Guys and Gals, if it isn't legal, notice I didn't say right, you shouldn't be doing it, whether it snagging fish or smoking pot or whatever. And no I'm not lilly white either, I done my share of boneheaded things in the past.

I don't want to abrogate anyones right against unlawful search and seizure.

I don't advocate legally prescribing greater power to our fish and wildlife officers.

I don't want to get involved in what you do in the privacy of your home, it's none of my business and generally what you do at home really doesn't have the opportunity to affect me directly.

But, what you do on the water can.

So, turning this whole thing back to the issue of fish and wildlife officers searching for violations and how far they can go.

I can't get inside the head of any fish and wildlife officer so I can't say with a certainty what is motivating them. I know that they are only human with all the faults and shortcomings and aspirations as the rest of us. And I know that some of them will abuse their authority and leave us with a bad memory or even worse. But, I have to assume that some of them at least, are out there because they care about the resource.

However, from the context of ensuring the protection of a sport that I and my family dearly love, and from all indications most of you hold dear, I challenge you to consider -

Using just one focal point for the sake of discussion, If we are true sportsmen (and women) then why not leave the item, that we don't want found, home when we go fishing.

I've never tried pot, and I'm not likely to, but I've known some people who used it. I don't see where you are going to become a better angler because you are using pot, and I don't understand how fishing could make using pot better, so just do one or the other.

Now if we have left the item home, and we are on the water, and we have the dubious pleasure of being inspected or searched and we have been fishing by the rules, then there is nothing to become excited about, we can help the fish and wildlife officers conclude their business with us in as rapid manner as possible and get on with our lives.

The fish and wildlife officers on the other hand are working with someone who is making their life a little easier, they can get done with us faster, and get on to the next guy (or gals) and just maybe they can catch some of the people who aren't playing by the rules and therefore decrease the number of people who are harming our sport.

As I stated a long time ago now, I personally don't have a lot of trouble with allowing a broad interpreation of the authority of fish and wildlife officers with regards to searching myself and my equipment while I am fishing. Because of the way I fish, (not gear or technique) I don't have to look over my shoulder to see who might be watching.

If voluntarily conceeding some of my constitutional right against search and siezure while in the field will help to remove some of the unlawful sportmen and women out there then I for one am all for it.

How about you, which is more important, the pot (or whatever) or the sport?

If we remove the element of discovery of whatever we don't want found, don't we remove the reluctance to co-operate with a search?

Cordially and respectfully,

Wes