# How many rods can you have??



## MuskyDan (Dec 27, 2001)

While fishing on Saginaw Bay 2 weeks ago our boat was checked. There were 4 legal fisherman in the boat and we had in our possession 10 walleyes. We were fishing with 8 rods, two a piece. We were told we were in violation because there were two legal limits in the boat and therefore could only legally fish with 4 rods. Obviously I was confused and I explained that each of us had only caught 2 fish but he informed me that I was wrong!! 

It makes sense but I haven't ever heard that before, were we actually in violation?


----------



## roger23 (Jan 14, 2001)

I have always been told that once you catch your limit ,you can still fish as long as you release the fish you have your limit of,many times we have caught our limit of Walleyes and trolled for smallmouth when we found them we would stop and cast ..


----------



## WALLEYE MIKE (Jan 7, 2001)

MuskyDan said:


> While fishing on Saginaw Bay 2 weeks ago our boat was checked. There were 4 legal fisherman in the boat and we had in our possession 10 walleyes. We were fishing with 8 rods, two a piece. We were told we were in violation because there were two legal limits in the boat and therefore could only legally fish with 4 rods. Obviously I was confused and I explained that each of us had only caught 2 fish but he informed me that I was wrong!!
> 
> It makes sense but I haven't ever heard that before, were we actually in violation?


You were just fine. 

Who "told" you you were in violation? A CO?


----------



## boehr (Jan 31, 2000)

MuskyDan said:


> ...were we actually in violation?


No you were not in violation.


----------



## gplant (Jan 17, 2008)

roger23 said:


> I have always been told that once you catch your limit ,you can still fish as long as you release the fish you have your limit of,many times we have caught our limit of Walleyes and trolled for smallmouth when we found them we would stop and cast ..


 I agree. I've talked to the DNR about this before and you are fine.But If it was a CO that told you this now a got to wonder.


----------



## GIDEON (Mar 28, 2008)

MuskyDan said:


> While fishing on Saginaw Bay 2 weeks ago our boat was checked. There were 4 legal fisherman in the boat and we had in our possession 10 walleyes. We were fishing with 8 rods, two a piece. We were told we were in violation because there were two legal limits in the boat and therefore could only legally fish with 4 rods. Obviously I was confused and I explained that each of us had only caught 2 fish but he informed me that I was wrong!!
> 
> It makes sense but I haven't ever heard that before, were we actually in violation?


 Did you recieve a ticket


----------



## MuskyDan (Dec 27, 2001)

nope, he just said once there are two legal limits in the boat the number of rods that can be used goes down.


----------



## Ausable Junkie (Oct 2, 2002)

I know it hasn't been established who gave the warning but regardless...


Boehr, sounds to me like the "warner" could be a C.O. that was invoking the "Targeting a species" loophole. Couldn't a C.O. maintain that: Using the tackle they were, and, having the fish they did in the boat, they were obviously targeting walleye, and the # of lines being used would exceed the legal limit considering the species "targeted"?

Myself, I see no legal recourse in the "Targeting a species" junk. Determining a persons intentions based on gear aboard or in the field is bogus. I only posed this scenario to see if its another possible way for sportsmen to get ticketed. Please clarify the "Targeting a species" loophole if you don't mind. Its a gray area that leaves alot to be desired for those in possible violation of the law.


----------



## boehr (Jan 31, 2000)

Question has been asked and answered.

If you are sure that is what you were told it would be best to contact the Bay City District Office and talk with the District Law Supervisor so that the Lt. can contact the officer (if it was a CO that told you that) and correct the officer. That way you do your part and ensuring no other legal participants are told wrong information.


----------



## boehr (Jan 31, 2000)

Ausable Junkie said:


> Boehr, sounds to me like the C.O. was invoking the "Targeting a species" loophole. Couldn't the C.O. maintain that: Using the tackle they were, and, having the fish they did in the boat, they were obviously targeting walleye, and the # of lines being used would exceed the legal limit considering the species targeted.
> 
> Myself, I see no legal recourse in the "Targeting a species" junk. Determining a persons intentions based on gear aboard is bogus. I only posed this scenario to see if its another possible way for sportsmen to get ticketed. Please clarify the "Targeting a species" loophole if you can. Its a gray area that leaves lots to be dedired for those in possible violation of the law.


We assume it was a CO but that question hasn't been answered yet. As for a loophole that you refer to, I don't see that loophole and if a CO told him that it is just flat out wrong and needs to be addressed as I stated above.


----------



## ridgewalker (Jun 24, 2008)

I agree the CO did not make sense. When I am checked by a CO, I always make sure I get their id from their name tag or if they are not in uniform, I politely ask for it. In some waters you can now use 3 lines apiece. There was a DNR survey regarding making this a statewide rule but I have not heard what happened to it. Good luck and I agree checking it out with the supervisor would be a smart plan.


----------

