# Snagging Case



## FISHMANMARK (Jun 11, 2007)

Interesting case... 


https://thedailynews.cc/articles/ionia-county-case-vs-fisherman-hits-a-snag/

IONIA — A fisherman was acquitted by a jury Thursday after he was charged with attempted snagging of salmon in the Grand River.


Charles Hollister of Battle Creek, at left, was acquitted by a jury Thursday after being charged with attempted snagging of salmon while fishing in Ionia County’s Grand River. Hollister is pictured with his defense attorney, Eric Matwiejczyk of Ionia. — Daily News/Elisabeth Waldon

A jury of four women and two men deliberated barely 20 minutes before finding Charles Hollister of Battle Creek not guilty in Ionia County’s 64A District Court.

According to the Michigan Department of Natural Resources (DNR), snagging is “attempting to take fish in a manner that the fish does not take the hook voluntarily in its mouth.” The misdemeanor attempt carries a maximum 45-day jail sentence, a $250 fine and possible loss of fishing license.

The case was one that got away from Giacomo Mattioli, recently hired to the Ionia County Prosecutor’s Office. Mattioli called DNR Conservation Officer Cary Foster to the stand as his sole witness.

Hollister and his longtime friend, David McCleary of Lansing, were fishing on the Grand River in Ionia County the morning of Sept. 29, 2017, while Foster watched them while hidden in a nearby forest for 20 to 30 minutes.

“Their lines had really excessive weights on them because when they cast the pole was really bouncy,” Foster testified. “He (Hollister) would reel quickly and then in a certain area he would make a jerking motion and then keep reeling fast. This happened several times, not every cast, but fairly often. At least every other cast, it was the quick jerking motion coming back. That led to me to believe that they’re attempting to snag the fish.

“Fish swim with their mouth open,” Foster added. “Snagging is attempting to catch a fish without it actually biting your line. To legally catch a fish, the fish is actually supposed to try to eat whatever bait or lure you have or voluntarily take it into their mouth.”

The jury watched two short video clips Foster took on his department-issued cell phone of the two men fishing. Foster identified Hollister on the video as standing in the river fishing; however, when McCleary took the stand for the defense, he identified himself on the video as standing in the river fishing. McCleary said Hollister could only briefly be glimpsed untangling his fishing line from the shore.

Foster said the men’s fishing equipment and fishing licenses were all legal. Foster said when he confronted the two men, they claimed to be “flossing” for fish.

“Flossing is when a fish swims upstream with its mouth open so subjects will cast their bait so that it goes into the fish’s mouth,” Foster said. “It’s very hard to tell if a fish is hooked inside the mouth or outside the mouth if it’s caught in this matter. I believe there is no difference, it is attempted snagging.”

However, Hollister and McCleary both adamantly denied they claimed to be flossing, adding that they had never even heard the term before.

Hollister’s defense attorney, Eric Matwiejczyk of Ionia, asked Foster whether he could know for sure that a fish voluntarily took a hook into its mouth.

“I cannot read a salmon’s mind, no,” Foster admitted.

McCleary was also charged with attempted snagging, but he instead pleaded to a civil infraction of littering. McCleary testified that Foster was “definitely” lying regarding his claim that the two men said they were flossing.

“He made that up,” McCleary said.

Hollister took the stand and detailed how he was fishing that day with a Shakespeare rod, a Quantum reel, a treble hook with a rubber egg and skirt on it and a 1 ounce weight. Hollister questioned Foster’s claim that the 1 ounce weight was “excessive.”

“The river flows fast,” Hollister said. “If you don’t use a heavier weight, the bait’s going to go right by you and you won’t have any chance of getting the fish.”

Hollister emphatically denied Foster’s claim that Hollister told him he was flossing.

“I’ve never used flossing as a term in my life as it relates to fishing,” Hollister said. “He did not state the truth. He was insistent that we were trying to snag and I was insistent that we were not.”

Although his friend pleaded to littering, Hollister refused to plead to anything.

“I’m not guilty,” he said. “I’m not going to admit to something I didn’t do.”

Judge Raymond Voet oversaw the case, noting, “Ultimately the jury’s going to have to decide who to believe.”

The jury deliberated about 20 minutes before returning with a not guilty verdict. Hollister and Matwiejczyk were pleased with the outcome.

“The only thing that can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt is that my client and his friend were fishing,” Matwiejczyk said. “They had legal tackle, they had a legal license, it was the season for fishing. Nothing, nothing, nothing has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt other than the fact that they were fishing.”

[email protected]


----------



## Rasputin (Jan 13, 2009)

A jury trial ? What a waste of resources.


----------



## Fishndude (Feb 22, 2003)

If I was going to rig up to line Salmon, it would sound an awful lot like what they were slinging. Make the leader over 6 feet long, and you are all set. Heavy weight, fast current, long leader, and treble hook.

Nobody on that jury has ever lined Salmon, apparently.


----------



## Trout King (May 1, 2002)

They were snagging. Being from the same area, there is absolutely no depth or current in that river where 1 oz is needed. Also, a lot of googan went down on snagging charges this year. Mr. Foster is a very fair and pretty lenient officer, too bad for him the jury is obviously oblivious to what snagging is. Treble hook, 1 oz sinker, jerking and reeling with a plastic egg, hmmmm.


----------



## 357Maximum (Nov 1, 2015)

Trout King said:


> They were snagging. Being from the same area, there is absolutely no depth or current in that river where 1 oz is needed. Also, a lot of googan went down on snagging charges this year. Mr. Foster is a very fair and pretty lenient officer, too bad for him the jury is obviously oblivious to what snagging is. Treble hook, 1 oz sinker, jerking and reeling with a plastic egg, hmmmm.


Even with that little bit of rain we had at the end of September that 1 ounce would have been pretty close to the equivalent of a downrigger ball in the Grand. Them two are lucky there were ZERO fisherpersons on that jury.


----------



## 357Maximum (Nov 1, 2015)

Fishndude said:


> If I was going to rig up to line Salmon, it would sound an awful lot like what they were slinging. Make the leader over 6 feet long, and you are all set. Heavy weight, fast current, long leader, and treble hook.
> 
> Nobody on that jury has ever lined Salmon, apparently.



In my experience lighter weights with a slightly floating/neutrally bouyant bait with that same long leader just ticking along with the current works a lot mo betta for flossing. You can actually feel the difference in the "take" with that rig, and you can actually predict whether the hook will be inside or outside of the jaw with the lighter rig....if one decides to set the hook.


----------



## jd4223 (Feb 12, 2012)

I had a DNR Officer tap me on the shoulder while I was steelhead fishing the Huron river in Flatrock. I was fishing down stream just where Telegraph crosses the river. I was using a 10 1/2 foot noodle rod with 6lb test mono on a spinning reel and a 1/32oz jig. The suckers were running at that time so thick you could walk across them to get to the other side. Every cast resulted in a sucker being hooked(90% fouled)the rest in the mouth. Every time I made a cast and started to reel in,I would feel what I believed to be a strike causing me to set the hook resulting in a fouled hooked sucker and every now and then a legally hooked sucker. The DNR accused me of snagging. I then cast my jig and handed the DNR my pole and told him to reel in the jig. Next thing I see,is the DNR setting the hook several times and then reeling in a fouled hooked sucker. I told him it looked to me as if he was snagging which he then replied"I see what you mean,sorry". I told him if he was really serious about enforcing snagging,he should go up to the foot bridge where the locals were using pool sticks for rods loaded with 40lb line and 1/2oz jigs with twister tails casting and ripping the jigs back...Don't know if he took my advice or not,but I didn't get a ticket.


----------



## 357Maximum (Nov 1, 2015)

jd4223 said:


> I had a DNR Officer tap me on the shoulder while I was steelhead fishing the Huron river in Flatrock. I was fishing down stream just where Telegraph crosses the river. I was using a 10 1/2 foot noodle rod with 6lb test mono on a spinning reel and a 1/32oz jig. The suckers were running at that time so thick you could walk across them to get to the other side. Every cast resulted in a sucker being hooked(90% fouled)the rest in the mouth. Every time I made a cast and started to reel in,I would feel what I believed to be a strike causing me to set the hook resulting in a fouled hooked sucker and every now and then a legally hooked sucker. The DNR accused me of snagging. I then cast my jig and handed the DNR my pole and told him to reel in the jig. Next thing I see,is the DNR setting the hook several times and then reeling in a fouled hooked sucker. I told him it looked to me as if he was snagging which he then replied"I see what you mean,sorry". I told him if he was really serious about enforcing snagging,he should go up to the foot bridge where the locals were using pool sticks for rods loaded with 40lb line and 1/2oz jigs with twister tails casting and ripping the jigs back...Don't know if he took my advice or not,but I didn't get a ticket.



Obviously that C.O has never spent any time in Omer in the spring either. :lol:


----------



## Treven (Feb 21, 2006)

The way I read it, the defendant's lawyer made the DNR look like fools, regardless of the make-up of the jury. If what the DNR officer was quoted saying on the stand is word-for-word direct quote, I wouldn't have found the individual guilty either... Jeebus, that was awful to read how the DNR officer portrayed the situation! They really needed to paint a clear and definitive picture that couldn't be refuted. The defense lawyer pretty easily refuted it based on our in-place regs and hearsay, essentially.

I would think maybe they should rethink their "snagging" regs to make situations like this black and white instead of gray... And probably coach the witness officer, at least a little, before going on the stand / public record! There are endless possibilities of how to go about doing that, but clearly, what is in-place now for regs didn't pan out so hot in an obvious snagging situation.

If we are going to eliminate snagging, we're probably going to need to eliminate "flossing" too, with leader length regs, among other things. NY is 4' max, right? Heaven forbid we alienate all the old school bottom bouncers and chuck-n-duckers in this state and mandate a reasonable leader length!


----------



## Floater (Feb 8, 2003)

The way I read it, there was a video of the "snagging" in action. I'm guessing the video didn't convince the jury that the fisherman was snagging.


----------



## Fishndude (Feb 22, 2003)

Treven said:


> If we are going to eliminate snagging, we're probably going to need to eliminate "flossing" too, with leader length regs, among other things. NY is 4' max, right? Heaven forbid we alienate all the old school bottom bouncers and chuck-n-duckers in this state and mandate a reasonable leader length!


I guess I am an "old school bottom bouncer," going on 45 years of Salmon/Steelhead fishing, now. I cannot remember the last time I tied on a leader that exceeded 3 feet, much less 4 feet. It just isn't necessary, if you are fishing for Biters. I would be in favor of restricting leader length to 4 feet, as NY did a number of years ago. Lining is a LOT more effective with very long leaders. 10' - 12' is incredibly effective, and there is a reason those are sometimes called "searching leaders." 

For what it is worth, snagging is trying to get a fish on the hook, without the fish having bitten, and being willing to accept the hookup anywhere on the fish. Lifting, (a NY term) or Lining is trying to foul hook fish in the mouth, which is still snagging, but kind of hard to prove in court. There are some guys in Sault St Marie who can literally float a fly (under a float) into the open mouth of Steelhead that are holding in a current. I've seen it, and while it is basically foul hooking fish, it is an amazing talent to be able to do it. 

Anyone who is yanking on their rod often during a Salmon spawning run, is either grossly uninformed, or trying to snag. Real Salmon fishermen only yank when they get a real BITE, and they know what that feels like. Bottom bouncing is not an overly effective way to catch Kings in a river. Float fishing for them is a much stronger option.


----------



## Robert Holmes (Oct 13, 2008)

Solid proof is if they hook one, land it and attempt to keep it.


----------



## JimP (Feb 8, 2002)

My go to technique for open water lake or river Pike casting is to let the spoon fall, reel a bit, sweep the lure say 4-5 feet, let fall, reel a bit and sweep again. This erratic retrieve works like a charm and to any bystander it may look like snagging. Never once snagged a Pike but tremendous aggressive grabs are the norm.


----------



## Trout King (May 1, 2002)

jimp said:


> My go to technique for open water lake or river Pike casting is to let the spoon fall, reel a bit, sweep the lure say 4-5 feet, let fall, reel a bit and sweep again. This erratic retrieve works like a charm and to any bystander it may look like snagging. Never once snagged a Pike but tremendous aggressive grabs are the norm.


Does that work for salmon with a ounce of weight, plastic spawn bag and a treble hook?


----------



## scubajay (Jun 9, 2003)

Who cares if somebody wants to, or is, snagging salmon in the river during autumn? They are half-dead, rotting, gross, about to die anyway. I say let ‘em have at it.


----------



## mbirdsley (Jan 12, 2012)

scubajay said:


> Who cares if somebody wants to, or is, snagging salmon in the river during autumn? They are half-dead, rotting, gross, about to die anyway. I say let ‘em have at it.


right, I’m torn on this. I wish some rivers were snagging rivers ie. ones that do not have natural reproduction. They are cat food as soon as they hit the Wier any how. Allow no snagging on rivers with reproduction. Only issue is snagging does not discriminate on what fish is snagged

Either the prosecutor or DNR officer needs to spend some time fishing that was just bad. Really bad prosecution in the court room.


----------



## Trout King (May 1, 2002)

mbirdsley said:


> right, I’m torn on this. I wish some rivers were snagging rivers ie. ones that do not have natural reproduction. They are cat food as soon as they hit the Wier any how. Allow no snagging on rivers with reproduction. Only issue is snagging does not discriminate on what fish is snagged
> 
> Either the prosecutor or DNR officer needs to spend some time fishing that was just bad. Really bad prosecution in the court room.


Correct, salmon doesn't discriminate. I have to disagree about opening rivers to snagging, let's take the Grand for example. Little natural reproduction occurs in the main river. This is very evident with the king stocking cuts. However, there are many tributaries, which I personally believe there is natural reproduction. This year I saw more Kings in smaller tributaries than I have in many years.


----------



## mbirdsley (Jan 12, 2012)

Trout King said:


> Correct, salmon doesn't discriminate. I have to disagree about opening rivers to snagging, let's take the Grand for example. Little natural reproduction occurs in the main river. This is very evident with the king stocking cuts. However, there are many tributaries, which I personally believe there is natural reproduction. This year I saw more Kings in smaller tributaries than I have in many years.


But, if you can’t even prosecute a snagging case right what is the point. That case made the state look stupid. I don’t snag so I’m not going defend snagging to the death. . Might as well put resources on a better river where the salmon depend on natural reproduction.


----------



## Downsea (Apr 12, 2005)

Trout King said:


> Correct, salmon _snagging_ doesn't discriminate. I have to disagree about opening rivers to snagging


Exactly. I remember when we were young snagging red horse and every once in a great while we'd get a walleye or pike. The canned red horse was sure good though.
This case was just fubared from the start.


----------



## mbirdsley (Jan 12, 2012)

Does the state have to reimburse legal fees?


----------

