Arizona Fish Report
Fish Report for 2-18-2016
Fish Report for 2-18-2016
Interfering with Fishing/Hunting vs. Hazing from Private Property
by Carrie Wilson
2-18-2016
Website
Question: My girlfriend and I were recently surf fishing on a local beach when some other “fishermen” showed up demanding we leave as it was their fishing spot. Things escalated quickly when one of the anglers cast his line over mine and intentionally cut it. From there the situation degraded with the other party making threats of death and bodily harm. All this over a barred perch fishing spot! The police got involved and the instigator ended up going to jail charged with a felony (for the threats).
I understand there are state laws that forbid individuals or groups from intentionally interfering with the legal hunting efforts of others. I believe these regulations were primarily created in response to anti-hunting groups trying to both intimidate legitimate hunters and scare away game from being accessible. Do these same laws apply to legal fishing?
Are the above-mentioned laws Fish and Game codes or some other California state statute, and are violations of these laws misdemeanors or felonies? I’d like to know if my legal fishing efforts were interfered with and whether I should ask the City Attorney to add any additional charges. (Dan F., Venice, CA)
Answer: You are correct in your understanding of laws regarding interfering with hunting, and these same laws protect any individual engaged in shooting, hunting, fishing, falconry, hunting dog field trials, hunting dog training or trapping where the activity is taking place … even for surf perch!
According to California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) Lt. Todd Tognazzini, Fish and Game Code, section 2009, is the law you are referring to and it is punishable as an infraction, but escalates to a misdemeanor for a second conviction in a two year period.
The law is a little different than most Fish and Game Code sections in that the wildlife officer has to establish that the offender has specific intent to interfere with the activities listed. In addition, “interfere with” is defined in the law as any action which physically impedes, hinders or obstructs the lawful pursuit of these activities, including but not limited to:
1. Actions taken for the purpose of frightening away animals from the location where the lawful activity is taking place,
2. Placing or maintaining signs, gates, locks or barricades that prohibit or deny access to lands without authorization from the landowner or lessee or an authorized designee of the landowner or lessee,
3. Placing food on lands not belonging to the person for purposes of eliminating the lawful ability to hunt due to the presence of bait.
I understand there are state laws that forbid individuals or groups from intentionally interfering with the legal hunting efforts of others. I believe these regulations were primarily created in response to anti-hunting groups trying to both intimidate legitimate hunters and scare away game from being accessible. Do these same laws apply to legal fishing?
Are the above-mentioned laws Fish and Game codes or some other California state statute, and are violations of these laws misdemeanors or felonies? I’d like to know if my legal fishing efforts were interfered with and whether I should ask the City Attorney to add any additional charges. (Dan F., Venice, CA)
Answer: You are correct in your understanding of laws regarding interfering with hunting, and these same laws protect any individual engaged in shooting, hunting, fishing, falconry, hunting dog field trials, hunting dog training or trapping where the activity is taking place … even for surf perch!
According to California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) Lt. Todd Tognazzini, Fish and Game Code, section 2009, is the law you are referring to and it is punishable as an infraction, but escalates to a misdemeanor for a second conviction in a two year period.
The law is a little different than most Fish and Game Code sections in that the wildlife officer has to establish that the offender has specific intent to interfere with the activities listed. In addition, “interfere with” is defined in the law as any action which physically impedes, hinders or obstructs the lawful pursuit of these activities, including but not limited to:
1. Actions taken for the purpose of frightening away animals from the location where the lawful activity is taking place,
2. Placing or maintaining signs, gates, locks or barricades that prohibit or deny access to lands without authorization from the landowner or lessee or an authorized designee of the landowner or lessee,
3. Placing food on lands not belonging to the person for purposes of eliminating the lawful ability to hunt due to the presence of bait.
Carrie Wilson is a marine environmental scientist with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife. While she cannot personally answer everyone’s questions, she will select a few to answer each week in this column. Please contact her at CalOutdoors@wildlife.ca.gov.
More Reports
2-18-2016
The CDFW has posted it's trout planting schedule for the week of February 14, 2016. Alameda County - Shadow Cliff Lake Contra...... Read More
2-17-2016
California’s key wildlife conservation planning tool, the State Wildlife Action Plan (SWAP), has received final approval from the U.S. Fish...... Read More
Arizona.FishReports.com © 2024. All Rights Reserved.
Website Hosting and Design provided by TECK.net
Website Hosting and Design provided by TECK.net