fishing regulations on private lakes

[smashdn]

If I own both sides of a non-navigable stream for several miles and I do not allow access to fish on it should I have to also follow those regulations?

I mean I am not allowed to even keep brook trout and they are on my land and in the stream that I have full control over.

[Duayne]

It may be helpful to understand the perspective of these regulations which is we may own land but we do not own the living creatures of the wild on that land. The ones that can come and go as they please do so but even those than can not are viewed the same. Of course they know that if you own both sides of a stream that has Brooke trout you could harvest them and there simply isn't a lot they can do about it. In that case, the regulations are there to help provide a guide line. I would also assume those regulations can help protect you if you or they catch someone fishing or hunting on your property.

[SLP]

IMO fish in streams should be regulated regardless if you are fishing on private property or not. I think a stream running through a persons property is entirely different than a pond located solely on private property.

However if a person builds a pond on his property, buys fish to stock it with his own money, I just can't see any logical argument for the state to regulate those fish.

I don't have a pond, and I doubt I ever will so really I don't have a horse in this race but I do find it interesting and it doesn't make any sense to me. I would love to hear the reasoning behind it. Even if a person chose to mismanage their personal investment, what business is it of the state? Those fish wouldn't even exist without the persons money and efforts.

Ironically I assume the land owner could legally choose to fill in the pond which would kill all the fish, but he couldn't cull out a fish one inch smaller than the legal limit. That's where the entire logic goes right out the window.

[Duayne]

I don't disagree with anything you said, SLP. I don't know if they can come up with something that covers all the ifs, whens and hows so I guess they don't even try. That's where selective enforcement probably comes into play. Let's face it, if a guy has his own farm pond that's full of small bass, no one is going to bust his chops for culling some out. But at least as it is today, if the same guy catches someone keeping his small bass and he gets them caught, there are regulations in place to add to the penalty.

[restornator]

i can think of one scenario where this would honestly make sense. If someone is at a gas station showing his buddies a cooler full of 10 inch bass, and the game warden just happens to walk by, the warden could fine him regardless of where the fish came from. There wouldn't be a grey area, if say the guy claims (lies) he caught them from his friend's pond.

[SLP]

i can think of one scenario where this would honestly make sense. If someone is at a gas station showing his buddies a cooler full of 10 inch bass, and the game warden just happens to walk by, the warden could fine him regardless of where the fish came from. There wouldn't be a grey area, if say the guy claims (lies) he caught them from his friend's pond.

Yeah, the fish should not leave the property unless they were fillets. If you are carrying around illegal fish, they could have been caught anywhere, so that should be illegal.

[SLP]

Duayne, that's a good point, plus trespassing.

I just found the thread an interesting discussion. I don't own a pond, but if I did it would bother me to be faced with having to be dishonest just to manage my own pond as I saw fit. That doesn't seem right.

But I likely will never be placed in that quandary

[bankbuster]

This is just another way for the government to let you know who is BOSS. Not to start another topic, but peraonally I am tired of Big Brother telling me what I can and can not do on MY Property. Regulation,regulation, regulation, what a croc.

[Shellkat]

You havent seen nothing yet, kinda like a realitive when you cut em off