And you may be right, but thats why I prefaced my comment.I thought dnr's jurisdiction extended to any standing body of water.
Except thats not quite the issue here. As I read the OP, its all about whether the pond owner can mismanage his own private property or if DNR has the ability to nanny him and fine them for failing to follow the rules that the public waters are subject to.Private is private. No license is needed. As long as you abide by the landowners rules, GTG. Obviously you want to be ecologically smart, but this is how trust is gained and lost.
That is what I also thought about being the biggest potential problem. Jim.I would worry about transporting off the property. If for some reason you get pulled over and found with fish outside the limit and fishing gear with no license it might get fun to prove where you got the fish. Just my paranoia showing.
IIRC from my days at DNR has to be either a 'water of the State' or a 'public freshwater lake.' Or maybe a 'navigable waterway'.I thought dnr's jurisdiction extended to any standing body of water.
You're at a red light at 3 am. It's been 2 minutes. You haven't seen a car.
How free are you?
I was alluding to the situation where you are in place to do something that is not wrong(in my eyes) but is against the law.
My grandpa owned a 20 acre property with about 8 acres of water between three separate ponds. It was on the edge of the city limits of a small town near Indian Lake in Ohio. Indian Lake is a huge state park and is always crawling with fish cops. We had a big family with tons of cousins, grandkids, etc so there were always kids fishing at his house.I don't know, the fish fuzz will drive all over hell's half acre to find some way to reach you to check your fishing license if he sees you.
which is problematic. As a LEO, it should be your job to prove my guilt. Its not my job as a free man to prove my innocence to you. Thats not how it is supposed to work.You are good to go, but I wouldn't flaunt it. As mentioned, it could get to be a real PIA to prove where you caught fish and had permission to do so. Then there is the idea that some CO's, when pissed off, or told what to do, or "read the law," can make things difficult for you, even when you are in the right.
Long story, but local guy plead to a poaching charge that he was not guilty of. I'm guessing that he was bossy to the rookie CO, after the CO being bossy to him? Guy could have beat the charge, but it would have cost him way more in legal fees than to just plead guilty. It cost "officer friendly" nothing, and possibly advanced his career? Just sayin' that it happens, I've seen it myself.
I actually did this on my way to work. I approached a 4 way stop and could see clearly at least 100 yards in each direction. no other cars as far as I could see so i made the turn without stopping. And nobody was harmed by my violation.I was alluding to the situation where you are in place to do something that is not wrong(in my eyes) but is against the law.
Said law is having a negative effect on you. If you break this law, it has zero effect on anyone else. Do you still follow the law for the sake of obedience, or do you break it because it has no negative moral implications. Therefore by breaking the law you are now net positive.
I have a complete stop rule. If I don't see anyone. Then I'm not even minutely, possibly harming anyone.I actually did this on my way to work. I approached a 4 way stop and could see clearly at least 100 yards in each direction. no other cars as far as I could see so i made the turn without stopping. And nobody was harmed by my violation.