07-23-2008, 09:56 PM
Troll wrote:
It is reasonable to assume that you are looking at over an hour wait for a response in a non-emergent situation from both Sheriff and CO's; particularly if you are in a remote area. You gonna wait that long? And are you gonna keep fishing in the meantime?
Do you think if both you complainants have your LEO show up (around the same time) they're gonna publicly disagree about law while you and the landowner, the respective complainants, are standing there?
Do you think if a LEO from one Agency shows up first, and is aware that a LEO from another Agency has been contacted (as a counter-complaint), that LEO is going to make an on-the-spot decision that might controvert the "opposing" LEO?
You mean attempt to be cited.
Your black and white answers probably, not possibly, don't apply here. Particularly if this law is going to be administered as a civil, instead of criminal violation. (And I don't know the answer to that)
And even if it's criminal, stream-fishing and its potential for being trespass is hardly going to be a pressing matter for LE. Just because the USC has recently made this issue a "current event", it doesn't mean it's a priority for everyone else.
Not trying to give you a hard time, Troll, jes offering up a reality check.
[signature]
Quote:I will dial the DWR hotline instantly and get a DWR officer on the scene as soon as possible, hopefully before the landowner gets a sherriff there.
It is reasonable to assume that you are looking at over an hour wait for a response in a non-emergent situation from both Sheriff and CO's; particularly if you are in a remote area. You gonna wait that long? And are you gonna keep fishing in the meantime?
Do you think if both you complainants have your LEO show up (around the same time) they're gonna publicly disagree about law while you and the landowner, the respective complainants, are standing there?
Do you think if a LEO from one Agency shows up first, and is aware that a LEO from another Agency has been contacted (as a counter-complaint), that LEO is going to make an on-the-spot decision that might controvert the "opposing" LEO?
Quote:Carry our own camera, take our own picture and have the landowners agent cited for harrassing a person legally engaged in fishing.
You mean attempt to be cited.
Your black and white answers probably, not possibly, don't apply here. Particularly if this law is going to be administered as a civil, instead of criminal violation. (And I don't know the answer to that)
And even if it's criminal, stream-fishing and its potential for being trespass is hardly going to be a pressing matter for LE. Just because the USC has recently made this issue a "current event", it doesn't mean it's a priority for everyone else.
Not trying to give you a hard time, Troll, jes offering up a reality check.
[signature]