Interesting day on PCR and F&W
 

Nice day on the ice today, Ice was around 16" by the boat launch.
3 nice burbots and about 8 walleye. In 23 FOW.

Someone called the F&W on our group saying we were cooking up walleye in our area. Sure enough when 2 F&W show up, they tore through all our belongings and through every inch of our vehicles. Apparently, the person who called in says we were stashing walleye in our vehicles and our backpacks. They also reported us cooking up a load of walleye. I kept all the burbot remains in a bag if we were to get checked, good thing I did. Cause it was the first thing F&W were looking for.
It is a good thing they are out checking, but this is ridiculous. Of the person actually witnessed us taking walleye why not confront us instead of making up false stories of stashing fish in our vehicles. Every part of the vehicle was checked even the engine bay, even my wife's purse was checked for walleye. My 8 year old daughter was asking "why are the police in my backpack, daddy?"
Geez a good relaxing day on the ice with te family turned into an embarrassing hunt for the falsely accused stashed walleye.
F&W apologized, for the intrusion, but I cannot blame them doing their job. As I have made frequent calls to them myself when I see or confront other poachers of their wrong doings.

I've fished for years and never encountered this... Funny thing is...
NOTHING we were doing were illegal nor one walleye was taken. All barbless hooks, eight licenses, one child fishing. Ok, maybe a warning on two cans of beer.

In the end all was good... Embarrassed but good.
On a side note though, no damn night Burbot was caught..

wow
 

Its usually better to call the F&W then confront a bunch of guys. For safety reasons.

I don't see a benefit to the accuser of falsely calling in and reporting you. Can not blame the F&W though, they believed they had a strong tip off and needed to search everything.

Unfortunate for you though

What were you using :confused: as bait and rigs

Don't get me wrong, I do not blame F&W at all for doing what they did. I knew something was up when they rushed us. Lol, should have seen them enter the lake, let's just say I wouldn't drive like that with my daughter in the truck on the ice. We had nothing to hide.. Just discouraging is all. They did what they had to do, no harm was done. Just please get the facts straight and true, rather than make stories up to harass a few guys and my family enjoying the day.

Your a stand up guy for your attitude towards the F&W many would not be. Just feel bad for your daughter hope she was not shaken to bad.

x2 - you had a burb fry - the average person going out for a quick day who didn't know a lot about fishing (myself at the start of last years open water) would never know there was anything but walleye in there :)

The fish guys just doing their job... I remember when someone said I was fishing with bait at carseland... lol the fish guy came down, asked for my license and stuff (this was a week after I got my license) and talked to me for a few... asked to look at my hook and laughed... He said some 'person' on the other side of the river saw me rig up bait! We had a good laugh, and talked about our similar appointments when it came to work. Never had a bad experience.

TR, friends, and I were out on lake x a couple weeks ago and had a CO come check out our rig. We got talking about the forum, the boy and girls meet, and caught a pike while he was there. He checked our sled for booze, checked 1 line, and watched us release a small pike. Stood around to BS for about 15 minutes before walking back across the ice. Good guys, doing a good job. Too bad there aren't more of them :)

I was thinking that it was strange that they were allowed to search you just based on a tip from another angler. I would think that they would be able to make contact with you to investigate, but need some sort of probable cause to go ahead and conduct such an intrusive search. But then I looked at the alberta fisheries act and it looks like they can search you whenever they want! Yikes! He just has to believe, on reasonable grounds, that either fish or fishing equipment are contained there (ice fishing tent, vehicle etc)

Am I the only one who finds it unreasonable that they can conduct such an invasive search without gaining probable cause from an initial investigation?

I know in your case you were cooking and had fish remains, but checking your engine bay, wifes purse etc?


Search

27(1) A fishery officer or fishery guardian may,

(a) on obtaining a warrant, or

(b) without a warrant if the officer or guardian believes on reasonable and probable grounds that it is not practical to obtain a warrant because the necessary delay may result in the loss of evidence,

search for fish and fishing equipment in any vehicle, aircraft, boat or other watercraft or railway car, or in any business premises, building, tent or structure unless it is used as a private dwelling, when, on reasonable grounds, the officer or guardian believes that fish or fishing equipment is contained there.
(2) A fishery officer or fishery guardian may require the operator or person in possession of a vehicle, aircraft, boat or other watercraft, railway car, animal, pack or container to produce all fish and fishing equipment in or on the vehicle, aircraft, boat or other watercraft, railway car, animal, pack or container for the purpose of inspection and to determine the number, species and size of the fish and to ascertain whether the fish are fit for human consumption, diseased or infested with parasites, if

(a) any fish or fishing equipment in or on the vehicle, aircraft, boat or other watercraft, railway car, animal, pack or container is in plain view of the officer or guardian, or

(b) the officer or guardian believes, on reasonable and probable grounds, that the vehicle, aircraft, boat or other watercraft, railway car, animal, pack or container contains or is carrying fish or fishing equipment.

(3) A fishery officer or fishery guardian may require the owner or occupant of any business premises, building, tent or other structure that is not used as a private dwelling to produce all fish and fishing equipment in the business premises, building, tent or structure for the purpose of inspection and to determine the number, species and size of the fish and to ascertain whether the fish are fit for human consumption, diseased or infested with parasites, if

(a) any fish or fishing equipment in the business premises, building, tent or other structure is in plain view of the officer or guardian, or

(b) the officer or guardian believes, on reasonable and probable grounds, that the business premises, building, tent or other structure contains fish or fishing equipment.

(4) When a fishery officer or fishery guardian requires a person to produce fish or fishing equipment for inspection under this section, that person shall forthwith produce all fish and fishing equipment in or on the vehicle, aircraft, boat or other watercraft, railway car, animal, pack, container, business premises, building, tent or other structure to the officer or guardian.

It's pretty amazing that an anonymous tip can lead to the searching of people, their possessions and vehicles.

If it was me, I would have been pretty angry.

We have laws against unreasonable search and to me this would have qualified.

Whatever happened to proof?

As I recall there are a bunch of militant members here with rap on speed dial who will call over any perceived violation.

No, I find it somewhat unreasonable.

That said, we can probably refuse a search to some degree with the option of arrest (?) I dont know.

Anything found in the search outside of fish and fishing equipment would likely not stand up in court.

Some evidence above and beyond a phone call should be required to conduct a search like that. I'd be surprised if it wasn't.

This is not only in Alberta it is the same way in many provinces.
If they suspect you are poaching THAT IS PROBABLE CAUSE if you refuse it is your right they then can detain you until law-enforcement arrives. If you have nothing to hide why worry. You complain that SRD dose not do its job right and then when they do you complain about that too......Perhaps there's a trend here...

I would suggest you go back to school before you try to give legal council.

It would just be easier if you knew the difference between opinion and a assumptions (I highlighted it for you), and legal counsel.

Troll on big guy

I personally disagree that a phone call from another angler should be enough probable cause to search my wifes purse.

As for worrying when i have nothing to hide, if you dont exercise your rights they are easily lost. I dont want the government to search me when there is no resonable reason to, based on the excuse that if i have nothing to hide then it shouldnt matter.

If your neighbour doesnt like you and decides to call the police and tell them you have a meth lab in your basement, should they be able to bust into your house to check based on that phone call alone?

Well said.

If I have nothing to hide, I should be free from search and seizure.

Peace officer 21(1) A fishery officer or fishery guardian, while administering this Act, is a person employed for the preservation and maintenance of the public peace.

(2) Notwithstanding subsection (1), a fishery guardian shall not exercise the powers of arrest given to a peace officer by section 495 of the Criminal Code (Canada).


It doesnt look like they can arrest if they find something else illegal ie drugs, but i would expect them to call the police.

It seems in my opinion that these officers did not have reasonable or probable grounds to execute a search beyond what was on the ice.

Things to be aware of when dealing with these people is whether you fall into the 'leading questions' trap.

"Do you mind if we take a look in your car" This can be worded many ways and made to seem like you have no choice in the matter.

It is very easy and good practice to tell officers that you do not consent to a search. This way they will ensure they have reasonable and probable grounds.

Something does not seem right here. The first thing that popped into my head is that maybe F&W stopped somebody coming off the ice that had illegal fish and they convincied the F&W that somebody was doing something illegal.:thinking-006: If you have one empty beer can and F&W see this that is probable cause to search. A bloody fillet knife or fish guts again probable cause. You do have the right to ask what they are searching for when they want to check a vehicle. Just my thoughts:scared0018:

it is funny how everytime some one disagrees with you their TROLLING
But i'm sure you will have a reason you can highlight for me it seems to be your specialty.

Sorry but if you read what you wrote you would see they can not search your person or your residence so your point is moot.

Most ridicules statement I ever read............ hahahahahaha

Where in the OP posting did he say they searched anything that was not on the ice

And did he post that he was not asked if they could search his property even though they don't have to ask.

Oh thats right this is just your OPINION for what thats worth ...

Not sure if I am being lumped in with the militant with RAP on speed dial but last spring I confronted some poachers and gave them the what for....called RAP with license plate and description.....have pics of their undersized fish if you want to see them.

To the OP sorry someone "suspected" you...in my case I knew 100 percent what was up.

LC

I have been checked soo many times over all the years I guided bird hunters I have lost count.

One thing for sure, no way in hell would I ever allow any CO to put one hand on my wives purse or likewise my wallet.

It is one thing to be co-operative another to stand by and let them start going through things like a purse. That is crossing the line and I would be letting them know in real loud terms that if they wanna start that crap then they best get their boss and the RC' out real quick cause that is where I draw the line.

It's not every time. It's everytime you attack my posts without adding anything to the discussion what so ever, I point out that you are trolling.

more or less

Again just your opinion I think there was something added to the discussion so no TROLLING by my opinion ...

Good point, I read the part about the personal dwelling, but forgot when I posted my point. Change it to car then. What if someone got mad at you because you cut them off and they decided to call the police and say you had drugs in your car? Or worse a gun? Would you be ok with the police pulling you over and searching all your belongings? Going through your wifes purse? I can understand getting pulled over, but I think that the initial investigation would have to introduce some sort of reasonable suspicion beyond the complaint for the officer to be able to perform an intrusive search.

Thats where youre wrong. It states fishery officers and fishery guardians. From what I know, guardians are not officers in anyway and have not received the training a fish and wildlife officer has and therefore cannot arrest anyone under the criminal code. Fish and Wildlife OFFICERS can charge you with any act and offence a police officer can. F&W officers can charge you with criminal code stuff, even murder. They actually have more power than a police officer. Police officers cannot charge anyone under the wildlife act, whereas F&W officers can charge people under the criminal code and the wildlife act. They also can give you tickets for any misdemeanors and whatnot, such as open liquor and various items like that.

It is not ridicules at all. To allow the government to search you just because you have nothing to hide is a very slippery slope. Would you be ok with random car searches? Random house searches? Random ID checks when walking down the street? Random weapons searches when walking down the street??

I know that these are extreme, but I hope you can see my point. We want to be free from illegal search and seizure.

We should require some sort of proof beyond someones unreliable word, before we have our stuff searched.

That is interesting. Can you post up some information to support that? I will try to find some..