Law Enforcement Showed Up
Posted: July 31st, 2018, 10:17 pm
Nice guy, just wanted to make sure guys weren't collecting without a license.
A Worldwide Community of Field Herpers
https://www.fieldherpforum.com/forum/
I see your point. When I am road cruising, most of the time, I just move them off the road, but if it is something I want to photograph, I usually bag the snake or put it in a cooler in my truck, but only for a few minutes until I find a safe place to pull off and park. I never have them in my possession for more than a few minutes, but I see how this could be problematic for both reasons you mention...stlouisdude wrote:LEOs wouldn't have any way to tell if you have a snake boxed up for keeping or to turn loose later, I think at that point you're just in possession either way so make sure whatever you have is legal. I actually think turning it loose later might be worse because now you've exposed it to foreign tools, boxes, etc and potential disease agents.
on a wildlife stop they would have probable cause to search (with no warrant) your vehicle and likely would. If you are in WW, which Lou was, you will surely be "unpacking" the vehicle when contacted by a warden so have your fishing license ready...my question to Lou is did you tell mr. warden that there are no coral snakes in CA? I do enjoy running their decoys over though....So my question is, did the LEO check your car to see if you were collecting or had instruments for collection? I ask, because I don't collect or keep, but I do pick up snakes on the road and temporarily hold them in bags or coolers and then photograph and release them near where I found them. I would imagine it would be difficult to convince a LEO that I am not collecting...when I have hooks and bags, etc in my vehicle...just curious as I do herp in California...
RenoBart wrote:I see your point. When I am road cruising, most of the time, I just move them off the road, but if it is something I want to photograph, I usually bag the snake or put it in a cooler in my truck, but only for a few minutes until I find a safe place to pull off and park. I never have them in my possession for more than a few minutes, but I see how this could be problematic for both reasons you mention...stlouisdude wrote:LEOs wouldn't have any way to tell if you have a snake boxed up for keeping or to turn loose later, I think at that point you're just in possession either way so make sure whatever you have is legal. I actually think turning it loose later might be worse because now you've exposed it to foreign tools, boxes, etc and potential disease agents.
I usually wash my coolers out with Clorox Clean-up and I do wipe my hooks.stlouisdude wrote:It won't offer you any legal protection, but cleaning any tools and containers with a (fresh, recently opened) container of diluted bleach and then thoroughly dried will at least give you some ethical peace of mind.
Good practice but unfortunately it will not stop Cryptosporidium as I understand it. Lou technically they could cite you, whether they would or not would depend upon the warden I suppose. "Take" is defined as pursue, harass, hunt, etc....so yes they could cite you for no license but it would be low hanging fruit.but cleaning any tools and containers with a (fresh, recently opened) container of diluted bleach and then thoroughly dried will at least give you some ethical peace of mind.
I would not do that!I told him I just make videos and that he was welcome to check our car if he wanted
Some sage advice there jimi but I’d be pleasantly surprised to see them not want to search once you have tipped your hand. As far as their concern over whether you are a solid citizen I can tell you from experience they don’t care and wouldn’t be able to determine that in the field anyway. I’m a “solid” citizen and professional biologist, well known in my community and all the resource agencies in the valley yet I had to deal with a rather nasty piece of cheese in WW one night and ended up with a low level citation which I fought for two years before it was done. I also filed a formal complaint about the nasty cheese which was upheld and I was vindicated BUT mr cheese ended up getting promoted when he should have been relegated to a desk job so go figure. Nowadays I make them work for it and do not extend trust to those who are supposedly trustworthy. Have a license in hand and be aware of your rights under the constitution. Failure to do so will only make your life difficult.If you have the license, way fewer guys are going to want to search. And, of them, fewer will ever invoke probable cause, since a license holder is ipso facto less likely to be a poacher. They're gonna want to leave you, a solid citizen, in peace and move on to find a dirtbag. There's a whole lotta dirtbags out there.
Well, try it, I can virtually guarantee you're gonna be pleasantly surprised at least once in a while. But when you aren't - that's where you pleasantly say "No PC? No warrant? You wanna touch my stuff? Thanks but no thanks. Have a nice night, see you later sir. I'm gonna keep hunting, legally, now."I’d be pleasantly surprised to see them not want to search once you have tipped your hand.
Mmm. I disagree with this. (Not your experience, but rather, your implication that it can be generalized.) Now like I said, everybody has a bad day now and then. But mostly, in my experience (and I have had some bad ones too!) if you don't light up their radar, you're good. Do you have a license? The right answer is yes. Do you appear to be nervous, evasive, or combative? Are you scary? The right answer is no.As far as their concern over whether you are a solid citizen I can tell you from experience they don’t care
That's all I'm saying. "You don't have to, and it's best if you don't."Have a license in hand and be aware of your rights
So this would be a huge no-no for a few reasons but most importantly to someone trying to not get a ticket or worse...RenoBart wrote:So my question is, did the LEO check your car to see if you were collecting or had instruments for collection? I ask, because I don't collect or keep, but I do pick up snakes on the road and temporarily hold them in bags or coolers and then photograph and release them near where I found them. I would imagine it would be difficult to convince a LEO that I am not collecting...when I have hooks and bags, etc in my vehicle...just curious as I do herp in California...
Ah, thank you Bill. Excellent item to mention. (Why didn't I? Does a fish perceive the water? Ha ha.)Interstate Wildlife Violator Compact...means your violations in one state, might influence your violations or even requests for licenses and permits in another!
Over 40 plus years of herping and yes I have been pleasantly surprised - once, maybe twice if memory serves. If you are stopped by a warden, there is no PC or warrant needed for a search if he observes you driving slowly, stopping for things, taking pictures etc...means your fair game. If you stop and look at a decoy, you are going to get contacted. If you tried to proceed as you mention above (which I totally agree with) - they're going to up the octane, 100% lock it in. That is the "attitude" that they love to exploit, seen it before and experienced it in WW with the aforementioned nasty piece of cheese. The "freedoms" we enjoy and the rights given by the Constitution are tenuous at best - I know that not all LE are bad, but there are enough bad ones that for me, I know when to try to "unring that bell". I am polite and cooperative to the point where I believe they are angling for something else - at that point the correct statement is "please call your supervisor to the scene as I refuse to answer anymore questions and feel unsafe at this point". They now have a choice; try to continue the intimidation, and lie that their supervisor is not available or they, if they are smart, work with you politely and expediently. Remember; LE of any kind are allowed to lie, intimidate, and threaten you with arrest if it serves their purpose, its part of their training.Well, try it, I can virtually guarantee you're gonna be pleasantly surprised at least once in a while. But when you aren't - that's where you pleasantly say "No PC? No warrant? You wanna touch my stuff? Thanks but no thanks. Have a nice night, see you later sir. I'm gonna keep hunting, legally, now."
Totally fine, everyone has their own experiences, but to resource agency LE, they simply don't care who you are and are not going to spend the time to find out. They write their citations and move on and let the courts figure it out. You could be Jane Goodall and they wouldn't care, perhaps they might take it easy on you if they knew who you were but ultimately that is not their job, their job is to write citations when they believe the law is being broken. Or as I recently saw, they will try to figure out what else they can nail you for or flip a coin to decide. Unfortunately, we live in a very different world than we did 20-30-40 years ago, and one of my favorite ways to respond to abuse of authority is explain that I served in the military and took an oath to protect our Constitution so why would I just flip over on my back and let my rights be trampled after passing through fire and deep water to protect them?Mmm. I disagree with this. (Not your experience, but rather, your implication that it can be generalized.) Now like I said, everybody has a bad day now and then. But mostly, in my experience (and I have had some bad ones too!) if you don't light up their radar, you're good. Do you have a license? The right answer is yes. Do you appear to be nervous, evasive, or combative? Are you scary? The right answer is no.
Well, I've never met you lateralis, but I can see your experience shows. While I do see some legitimacy in a portion if what I feel Jimi is trying to say, you sir are basically speaking the gospel. My father retired after 23 years with CDFG (he retired before the name change--which I hate anyway--so...). He and I are close and both love reptiles and herping. He later went on to be an attorney and a judge pro-tem. He was one of the very best wardens this state has ever seen--and a former Marine from the Vietnam era (proud of him? hell yes I am!). My dad was fair and used a great deal of discretion and rarely went after the low hanging fruit you mention (but you're right...others can and do). In his later years before full retirement he went on to defend some of the same hunters and fisherman in court that he had cited and even arrested years earlier when they contacted him as an attorney for legal representation because he felt they were getting the shaft by F&G (talk about respect--going in BOTH directions). You should have seen the look on some of the prosecutors' faces when the defense attorney was a former game warden who knows that portion of the law intimately. But that is another story.lateralis wrote:Over 40 plus years of herping and yes I have been pleasantly surprised - once, maybe twice if memory serves. If you are stopped by a warden, there is no PC or warrant needed for a search if he observes you driving slowly, stopping for things, taking pictures etc...means your fair game. If you stop and look at a decoy, you are going to get contacted. If you tried to proceed as you mention above (which I totally agree with) - they're going to up the octane, 100% lock it in. That is the "attitude" that they love to exploit, seen it before and experienced it in WW with the aforementioned nasty piece of cheese. The "freedoms" we enjoy and the rights given by the Constitution are tenuous at best - I know that not all LE are bad, but there are enough bad ones that for me, I know when to try to "unring that bell". I am polite and cooperative to the point where I believe they are angling for something else - at that point the correct statement is "please call your supervisor to the scene as I refuse to answer anymore questions and feel unsafe at this point". They now have a choice; try to continue the intimidation, and lie that their supervisor is not available or they, if they are smart, work with you politely and expediently. Remember; LE of any kind are allowed to lie, intimidate, and threaten you with arrest if it serves their purpose, its part of their training.Well, try it, I can virtually guarantee you're gonna be pleasantly surprised at least once in a while. But when you aren't - that's where you pleasantly say "No PC? No warrant? You wanna touch my stuff? Thanks but no thanks. Have a nice night, see you later sir. I'm gonna keep hunting, legally, now."
Totally fine, everyone has their own experiences, but to resource agency LE, they simply don't care who you are and are not going to spend the time to find out. They write their citations and move on and let the courts figure it out. You could be Jane Goodall and they wouldn't care, perhaps they might take it easy on you if they knew who you were but ultimately that is not their job, their job is to write citations when they believe the law is being broken. Or as I recently saw, they will try to figure out what else they can nail you for or flip a coin to decide. Unfortunately, we live in a very different world than we did 20-30-40 years ago, and one of my favorite ways to respond to abuse of authority is explain that I served in the military and took an oath to protect our Constitution so why would I just flip over on my back and let my rights be trampled after passing through fire and deep water to protect them?Mmm. I disagree with this. (Not your experience, but rather, your implication that it can be generalized.) Now like I said, everybody has a bad day now and then. But mostly, in my experience (and I have had some bad ones too!) if you don't light up their radar, you're good. Do you have a license? The right answer is yes. Do you appear to be nervous, evasive, or combative? Are you scary? The right answer is no.
Bottom line, get a license and pay to play, its a small price to pay to avoid having a trip delayed or getting a ticket. Is it right to have to pay to take a picture of a reptile or frog hell no, but is it worth fighting over in court where you WILL spend far more than what you would have spent on a stupid fishing license, hell no again. To each their own but eventually everyone's luck runs out and one will run into bad cheese, whether you take a bite or not is up to you.
Cheers
I think maybe I've been misinterpreted - my comment was only within the context of having a license on you, and presenting it when asked:While I do see some legitimacy in a portion if what I feel Jimi is trying to say, you sir are basically speaking the gospel. (...) Trying to play some of these games just doesn't make sense in the end and can be an enormous waste of your time, energy, and money.
Lou got lucky and I said as much ("you were pretty much "fishing" without a license"). I suggested he can improve the odds of maintaining positive interactions by just buying the license. I said it was no guarantee they'd be nice next time, but it would sure help.I suggest you just buy the license, show it proudly when asked, and politely decline to ever offer your vehicle up for a search. If you have the license, way fewer guys are going to want to search. And, of them, fewer will ever invoke probable cause, since a license holder is ipso facto less likely to be a poacher. They're gonna want to leave you, a solid citizen, in peace and move on to find a dirtbag. There's a whole lotta dirtbags out there.
The alternative (status quo) is to not buy a license, offer them any search they want, and then hope for no tickets. You may get no tickets for possessing without a license (technically, holding or hooking or tailing a snake when they roll up is "possessing"). But - even in the absence of possession - I do think you are at risk of being guilty of "fishing" without a license. Think about a lake or river - does fishing and not catching require a license? Does catch and release require a license? The fish cops are the herp cops. Same guys. Put yourself in their shoes. Consider that - like anyone - they have good days, and bad days, and days they just want to hit something. Days like that, you don't want to resemble a dirtbag. Your intent will not matter.
I don't.Pay to play...I like that.
I think maybe I've been misinterpreted - my comment was only within the context of having a license on you, and presenting it when asked:
No, you have not been misinterpreted...defensive yes, but not misinterpreted. The first quote of mine was referring to agreeing with your two primary points:I think maybe I've been misinterpreted - my comment was only within the context of having a license on you, and presenting it when asked:
The games I am referring to are ones people play all the time: spending more time and energy trying to avoid something that could far more easily be handled in a simpler manner. The reason I phrased my initial sentence the way I did is that there are other parts of your post that without further explanation from you I cannot be sure I agree with you on--but not the points up top (the ones you quoted). Now a word to the wise...if you are trying to have an intelligent discussion with me, don't start out a sentence with "So, uh."Bottom line, get a license and pay to play, its a small price to pay to avoid having a trip delayed or getting a ticket. Is it right to have to pay to take a picture of a reptile or frog hell no, but is it worth fighting over in court where you WILL spend far more than what you would have spent on a stupid fishing license, hell no again. To each their own but eventually everyone's luck runs out and one will run into bad cheese, whether you take a bite or not is up to you.
It's disrespectful and will absolutely get you a different kind of response from me. I think you know this and did so out of spite. Not a surprise. And as I explained above, you were barking up the wrong tree to begin with.So, uh - what games are you talking about?
That is purely and simply your opinion, a fact you did not bother to qualify your statement with. You are not an authority on that phrase yet stated it as fact with no support. And for the record, I have asked a handful of people what their interpretation of that phrase is, and they all come back with a much more general take on it than you do...i.e. not objectively nefarious but a simple, "if you are going to engage in something, then you'd better do what's necessary and not cheat the system." I have not run in to anyone yet who immediately states that it is associated with maliciousness or corruption specifically.There is a strong negative connotation with that term, a strong association with corruption.
The real term is "user pays".
Again, based on what? This is again (whether assumed to be or not) opinion unless you back it up.User pays. It's not "pay to play", it's "user pays.
I didn't mean it that way. I started writing without the "so, uh" and it looked harsher, so I tried to mellow it out with a softer preface. That's all. I didn't "know this" (that it's disrespectful) and certainly wasn't acting out of malice. To me it just makes it more casual. That was my intent. I don't want to slam you. I don't even know you.Quote:
So, uh - what games are you talking about?
It's disrespectful and will absolutely get you a different kind of response from me. I think you know this and did so out of spite.
Maybe it's generational? Maybe geographic? Pay to play DEFINITELY has strong negative connotations in some circles. Here's the Google Dictionary return - the first definition being more in line with yours, the second definition modified somewhat by "US", which I assume to mean something like "this definition is more specific to the US", but regardless being more in line with mine:There is a strong negative connotation with that term, a strong association with corruption.
That is purely and simply your opinion, a fact you did not bother to qualify your statement with.
I think that serves to illustrate it is not "just my opinion".pay-to-play
adjective
adjective: pay-to-play
relating to or denoting an arrangement in which a charge must be paid to play a game or sport.
"both municipal courses are also available on a pay-to-play basis"
US
(especially in politics) relating to or denoting a situation in which payment is demanded, often illegally, from those wishing to take part in a particular business activity.
"a pay-to-play scandal haunts the hundred-billion-dollar state pension fund"
Language is interesting, in that it evolves very rapidly and has many "subcultures". But it is not strictly a matter of vox populi du jour; there's a lag. Also - perhaps you have a small sample, drawn from a narrow frame? We all tend to know people more like us, than unlike us, in terms of age, ethnicity, educational attainment, economic class, political orientation, etc. It's neither good nor bad, it just is. Good or bad comes from what you do with it, or do about it.I have asked a handful of people what their interpretation of that phrase is
Nothing, in general. They provide things people need, like places to live and work, and jobs, and they operate within the social environment they come into. Of course like many organisms they try to modify their environment (e.g., by lobbying), but to expect otherwise would be to dehumanize them and also to disrespect our system of republican democracy. Why shouldn't they have representation? In general I believe crappy development - and the developers that help deliver it - accompanies weak institutions and disordered or distracted societies. Good development - and the developers that help deliver it - accompanies strong institutions and orderly, focused societies. Pay to play is pretty rare in societies with strong institutions, and utterly endemic, just rampant, in societies with weak ones.And lastly...what do you have against developers?
I agree they get the blame. I think that's childish though. Developers would get the blame for urbanizing western Kansas if they could get anyone to move there! The problem with SoCal is just it's so damn nice (well, it used to be...ha ha) and everyone wanted to move there from about 1945, onward. And until it was too late, there was no societal/political recognition that perhaps leaving a little bit unpaved would make for a nicer future. Keep some orchards, keep some pasture, keep some brush. Ah, nothing left now but the steep rocks. Oh well...for an interesting comparison see western Marin and Sonoma counties. Looks a whole lot like the first time I ever first saw it, in the mid 80s. That's pretty nice. Nobody can afford to move there, but hey, you can say the same for SoCal. But if I had to pick one or the other, I know which one I would pick!I think the problem with developers is that they get blamed for the urbanization of Southern California.
I think we are getting to the same place, just depends upon ones view of what they are paying for in the end. For me I pay to play (photograph reptiles), occasionally i use my license to fish (using resources), but primarily it’s so I will not be bothered if I go road cruising and get contacted because the fishing sucks here (no tarpon or snook)User pays. It's not "pay to play", it's "user pays".
Jimi, thank you for taking the time to formulate this response. I very much respect it. Now that we have a solid volley between us, I can tell you are a very intelligent person. I am taking the numerous examples and sources you offered and will use them to enhance my understanding of these things for sure--so definitely no time wasted in including them all. I appreciate the passion and experience contained in your posts here too. Hopefully I did not come off too off-putting, but I too am passionate and sometimes the RPM gets up there a bit.Alright Drake, I'm going to try and de-escalate some here.
No sweat, me too. And you nailed me on "defensive", I can be like that.Hopefully I did not come off too off-putting, but I too am passionate and sometimes the RPM gets up there a bit.
Mmm. There may be something to this, but I gotta share, I fear it's a lot more complicated or nuanced. We can all wish and imagine something like "progress is linear and deterministic, and if we can just outlast the bastards the new generation will fix everything". But culture perpetuates. And sometimes, things get worse, not better. It's certainly true in my experience that equating herping with poaching, and ascribing ridiculous values to this herp taxon or that, are enduring themes in American state (and probably federal...) wildlife agencies. Here for example, we are still confronted with the mythical "$400 milksnake". Maybe in the early 1980's tricolor craze, there was one guy who'd pay that. Maybe he did pay that, once. Or maybe that was a real asking price that never got paid. Whatever. In 2018? It's laughable. It's repugnant. But I can still hear about that "$400 milksnake" anytime I like, all I have to do is start a conversation. Seriously, it's like hearing about a $400 reel-to-reel stereo component. "That's old news, man." (Unless I'm missing something...)I also think part of this is somewhat of a learning gap in that, I remember talking to some older wildlife folks who came from the buck and trout side, and they were parroting some misconceptions like "all Herpers are poachers" and "the value of some collected species was huge."
My perception today is that the younger wildlife managers and LEOs have a more realistic perception of the reality of the herp world. (Again, tell me if youe disagree.)
"Promotion to where they can do less harm" is a very common strategy with employers or managers who can't or don't know how to discipline or terminate problem employees. And yeah, a jackass is just a jackass - there was also that notorious Whitewater fish cop. The hell of it is - this works both ways. Most LEOs have probably never even met a herper. If the first one they meet is a jackass, or worse, "a poacher" (someone pursuing wildlife without a license), well...he might be inclined to suspect the next one he runs into. This is why I preach to herpers "Represent us. Do it well." Start by carrying a license, if you're gonna pursue herps. "Oh, but I'm not one of those yucky collector guys" doesn't cut it.Some of the Texas folks will remember a badge heavy LEO in south Texas in the '90s who was confrontational with everyone.
(He was promoted for his incompetence! LOL) This one person turned many Herpers off on all wildlife enforcers.
I hear you. And I also think it's not quite exactly that simple. Like I said earlier to Lou, if it was purely observational and hands-off it would be one thing (no license needed). But for example on this forum - I think most of these photos required some hands-on interaction with the beast, and often with its habitat. Turning up the animal. Stopping the animal from leaving. Posing it for this shot or that. Maybe posing it for the 5/10/20 other shots we don't see.It’s sad to an older cat like myself to see the simple act of getting out into nature with a camera regulated to such a degree.
I will do so with pride in both of you, sir!(FD, tell your father "semper fi" for me.)
Could not agree more. These numbers are not supported by enough science to warrant being so low. It is Draconian to say the least.What is over-regulation, on the other hand (in my book) is having "secure" species in no-touch status (some states treat ALL their herps like this!), or having low bag or possession limits on "secure" species. Like, why on Earth would the personal possession (not just daily bag, but possession) limit for glossy snakes or sidewinders in CA be two?