He had an accident.
Perhaps but more importantly shouldn’t the shitters shitting in it be reprimanded?
Lots of people like to think that public property = their property, which is true to a very tiny extent. But the real way to think about public property is that its mostly everybody elses property and you need to treat it how everybody else wants it treated, not just how you feel it should be treated.
I wonder if this is true everywhere. It makes sense to me to regulate fishing in a shared lake or in a stream passing through multiple properties, but a coworker from TX in under the impression that he was required to have a licence to fish in the isolated “tanks” on his parents’ property.
I’m not sure. I should add that the catch limits still apply even if you are fishing/hunting on your own property. The way the law reads here is that no hunting or fishing license is required for landowners OR their resident (of the state) children.
That’s some bullshit!
So I can’t go and catch hundreds of fish, fry them, load them in the back of my pickup, and sell em at a flea market? People could make a living off such, it sucks that the govt doesn’t want that.
Well, that’s how we had to end up with the Migratory Bird Act, because we started running out of migratory birds.
Yeah, you can’t sell food off the back of your pickup without permits either. Man, the government’s got its hand in everything!
On the other hand, there aren’t a lot of people dying of cholera in America either. On the whole, it’s a pretty good trade-off.
Actually, people do make a living doing that (with minor differences.) They need a commercial fishing license.
Y’see, there are professional fishermen too…
:dubious:
Seriously, does it not occur to you that if you take hundreds of fish out of public waters for moderate periods of time, soon there will be no more fish in those waters? And that the lack of fish may cause harm to other people and the ecosystem in which the fish used to live? This was addressed in the first two replies to your OP… it is just hard to imagine why this is a surprise to you, that the government tries to make sure our natural resources aren’t abused.
I’d just go to 'nother lake.
How does one get a commercial fishing license.
“The government” does want that. It’s only viable if it is done with some sort of control.
See, you can have that approach for one year, or you can manage the approach and hopefully have commercial fishing and canning (and restaurants) around much longer.
Nothing wrong with managing something (and I am an economic conservative).
And can’t we just breed the fish, so they won’t get depleted?
I typed “you” when I should have typed “one,” as in “If one takes hundreds of fish out of public waters for moderate periods of time, soon there will be no more fish in those waters.” That’s why there’s license and catch limits. If there were no fishing licenses, and people got in the habit of taking hundreds of fish out of lakes and selling them at flea markets, there would be no more fish for you to catch.
That’s what fishing licenses pay for: to hire people to restock fish.
I was told (by the camp host) that you don’t need a fishing licence to fish from the shore of a MN State Park. Size and catch limits still apply.
Brian
p.s. cite: Fish for free in most Minnesota state parks | Minnesota DNR
Nor do you need one to fish off piers in California. As in the ones which jut out into the water, not a dock.
Why can’t I go out and shoot as many passenger pigeons as I want, and sell them? Nobody owns them, right?
Oh wait, passenger pigeons are extinct from overhunting. Because at that time, there were no bullshit licensing requirements, anyone who wanted could harvest as many pigeons as they wanted. Which they did, until the last one was eaten.
In some states I’ve heard no liscense is required if you fish with a cane pole from the shore. But don’t quote me on that.
It’s not just the OP…how come people in general don’t understand (or admit) that if you kill all there are of a given thing, there ain’t no more?