# Ice Fishing Rules ?



## river rat78 (Dec 30, 2010)

I would of reported that CO officer. There is no excuse for his actions. He sounds like someone that likes to abuse power when it's given. To the OP. Sorry to hear about your buddy getting a ticket and not a warning. When you buy a fishing license it's your responsibility to know the rules and regulations. The books are free at any store or baitshop that sells fishing/hunting license. Or you can read them online. Hopefully this won't ruin his experience and he will read up the on the rules and enjoy his time out on the ice with his family.


----------



## taizer (Feb 6, 2009)

know the rules if you fish. The officer cant just just give every person that doesn't know what their doing a warning. It doesn't work like that, rules are rules


----------



## sbooy42 (Mar 6, 2007)

WALLEYE MIKE said:


> You need the OWNERS name. Some people may borrow from a friend to use.


I wonder what they do if the owner is not present?


----------



## WALLEYE MIKE (Jan 7, 2001)

WELDINGROD said:


> It would be nice if the intention behind the law was respected instead of the fine wording of it.... i.e. did this guy have an illegal number of tip-ups? if not I can also see a warning would make more sense...
> 
> I thought there was also supposed to be a maximum distance you are supposed to be within the tip-ups...???


Under immediate control. Usually up to the CO. 1/2 mile away, no way. 100ft. no problem.



sbooy42 said:


> I wonder what they do if the owner is not present?


CO will probably watch to see who tends to each one. Have one guy tending 6 tipups CO will consider him fishing with 6 poles even tho 3 guys might be using 2 each in theory. Only tend those you are fishing with not you buddies while your at it.


----------



## Martian (Apr 28, 2011)

what we do is put a address mailer on each trap. I do not know about wood, but they stick for years on plastic. $195 per tipup, is idiotic, I also think he could have got on a computer, and if you had no priors, should have cut you a warning instead. IMO.


----------



## Robert Holmes (Oct 13, 2008)

I put my name and address on my tip ups and by mid winter it washes off. I have been checked many times each winter and no CO has ever said anything. Just luck of the draw I guess, someone must have pissed in the CO"s oatmeal or something. That is real bad PR for the DNR.


----------



## flyting (Jan 22, 2010)

Someone has mentioned in the past use your unused deer tag for a flag. Lord knows we all have them!! All info needed is on that. Just don't lose it. yikes.


----------



## sbooy42 (Mar 6, 2007)

WALLEYE MIKE said:


> Under immediate control. Usually up to the CO. 1/2 mile away, no way. 100ft. no problem.
> 
> CO will probably watch to see who tends to each one. Have one guy tending 6 tipups CO will consider him fishing with 6 poles even tho 3 guys might be using 2 each in theory. Only tend those you are fishing with not you buddies while your at it.


Yeah probably... Just wondering because my name is only on couple tip ups the rest have my kids names on them..sometimes the kids aren't with me yet I use their tip ups...
Guess its one of those bridges you cross when you get there..


----------



## dalejiw25 (Jan 13, 2012)

It's all about "Revenue". Anything to control and financially weaken the working class. I wouldn't be a bit surprised if their next step is to create a fiasco like the CPL crap. You'll have to take an Ice fishing class($100) and then purchase a separate license at an outrageous fee. If you decide to take your dog along with you, you'll need a dog walking license (another fee) for that. Hell, why not a HAZMAT class and license for hauling around that propane or white gas ??? A limit as to how many persons allowed in shanty ?? Weight restrictions on tow-able sleds ?? Checkpoint Charlie at the launch. Whoaaa!!! Enough, I need a beverage and a smoke. C-ya !!!


----------



## wildcoy73 (Mar 2, 2004)

Can not see where a name on a tip up helps with line count. I have 20 tipups and allow all my buddies to use them. 
And the all have my identification on them.
I use old tags on them.


----------



## swampbuck (Dec 23, 2004)

There is a wide variety in the quality of CO's in this state.


----------



## baldwinbucks (Oct 8, 2009)

Fine seems a bit overkill for such a small mistake.... Shoulda got a warning... My 2 cents


----------



## WALLEYE MIKE (Jan 7, 2001)

WALLEYE MIKE said:


> Under immediate control. Usually up to the CO. 1/2 mile away, no way. 100ft. no problem.
> 
> CO will probably watch to see who tends to each one. Have one guy tending 6 tipups CO will consider him fishing with 6 poles even tho 3 guys might be using 2 each in theory. Only tend those you are fishing with not you buddies while your at it.


Let me add I was assuming each of the 3 had a regular line in the water also to make 3 lines each.


----------



## WALLEYE MIKE (Jan 7, 2001)

wildcoy73 said:


> Can not see where a name on a tip up helps with line count. I have 20 tipups and allow all my buddies to use them.
> And the all have my identification on them.
> I use old tags on them.


Don't see whats hard to understand. Matters little how many you own, it matters how many you are using at one time.


----------



## TwoDogsAndABoat (Aug 18, 2008)

PHD265 I sent you a PM.

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Ohub Campfire mobile app


----------



## vsmorgantown (Jan 16, 2012)

CO sounds like a complete a******......too bad for your buddy, so much for a quality family day on the ice. This CO could've used a situation like this to help foster a better public image for themselves. He could've had a nice friendly talk with this family, issue a warning, wish them good luck and good fishing and, lastly, remind them again to put their name on their tip-ups but instead he does what only a douche would do and writes them up....and they wonder why much of the public has a bad image of them.


----------



## baldwinbucks (Oct 8, 2009)

When I got my ticket a few days ago my buddy decided we didn't need to put his out because we were already chasing flags on me and my sons four... After being checked and ticketed he was told he could be givin a ticket just for having them with him in his sled..... He had old hunting tags pinned to his and we were told those did not meet requirents! I know I should of had my stuff legal and I can't argue that at all but a simple warning to some one that has never had a ticket before would have been a lot better. Instead this co ruined a fun day taking kids out to chance little pike and throw them back.


----------



## zep02 (Mar 29, 2007)

vsmorgantown said:


> CO sounds like a complete a******......too bad for your buddy, so much for a quality family day on the ice. This CO could've used a situation like this to help foster a better public image for themselves. He could've had a nice friendly talk with this family, issue a warning, wish them good luck and good fishing and, lastly, remind them again to put their name on their tip-ups but instead he does what only a douche would do and writes them up....and they wonder why much of the public has a bad image of them.


I guess it's all how you look at the situation. Ignorance isn't an excuse for breaking a law. Funny how people point the finger at the law enforcement officer and blame them for "ruining my day!" Instead; realize that you have done something wrong and accept responsibility for your actions. His job is to uphold the law.


----------



## Outdoor2daCore (Nov 8, 2010)

It's BS in my opinion shoulda been a warning with no second chance unless there were other violations he let ya off on or you were talking back to him


----------



## tightlineyellowline (Mar 11, 2014)

I have had a issue with a DNR Officer with traps that had my name and address on those , my son was using them I was not trapping his quote was. Your name on them your using them. So do not loan your traps or tip ups to your friends at any time. This Officer did let me off with out a citation but fully explained how it is written


----------



## dalejiw25 (Jan 13, 2012)

HAHAHA Here's the real reason for the ticket. "Revenue". This State has turned into nothing more than a ruthless, cold-hearted, cash grab State. Hang on to your wallets folks, They're comin for it.
It's no longer "To serve and protect" it's now "To harass and fine"

http://www.mlive.com/lansing-news/index.ssf/2015/01/new_michigan_fishing_hunting_l.html#incart_river


----------



## Magnet (Mar 2, 2001)

Wow. So many think that you can just ignore the rules and then only deserve warnings for doing so.

Sorry, but I just don't understand that kind of thinking.

Ignore the rules and then bitch because the C.O. did his/her job.

We should be bitchin' when they don't do their job.


----------



## bheary (Dec 29, 2010)

Magnet said:


> Wow. So many think that you can just ignore the rules and then only deserve warnings for doing so.
> 
> Sorry, but I just don't understand that kind of thinking.
> 
> ...


Yup!


----------



## TK81 (Mar 28, 2009)

I hope the guy that got the ticket is of sufficient means that this incident will not negatively impact his likelihood of taking the kids out again. $195.00 is some serious money for some families, especially for a rather insignificant crime, compared to some of the trespassing and poaching that goes on. I have no issue with CO's issuing tickets where they are deserved, but my considerable contact with various CO's makes it hard to believe one would write for this infraction in the situation described in the original post. 

I would like to know the real reason behind the law in the first place. If, as reported in a previous post, it is not how they monitor how many lines you are fishing...then what is the purpose?


----------



## Magnet (Mar 2, 2001)

TK81 said:


> I hope the guy that got the ticket is of sufficient means that this incident will not negatively impact his likelihood of taking the kids out again. $195.00 is some serious money for some families, especially for a rather *insignificant crime*, compared to some of the trespassing and poaching that goes on. I have no issue with CO's issuing tickets where they are deserved, but my considerable contact with various CO's makes it hard to believe one would write for this infraction in the situation described in the original post.
> 
> I would like to know the real reason behind the law in the first place. If, as reported in a previous post, it is not how they monitor how many lines you are fishing...then what is the purpose?


On the other hand...... If the C.O. would have just gave them a warning, the kids might inherit the idea that it's ok to break the law, as long as the law is insignificant.


----------



## TK81 (Mar 28, 2009)

Magnet said:


> On the other hand...... If the C.O. would have just gave them a warning, the kids might inherit the idea that it's ok to break the law, as long as the law is insignificant.


Maybe, but I think most CO's would have used this as a teaching moment. Perhaps this experience will taint the kid's perception of CO's. 

I wasn't there and we don't know exactly the situation or attitudes the CO had to deal with; it just seems harsh to me. Just my opinion. I also tend to question laws that don't make sense. Perhaps there is a perfectly logical and necessary reason for the tip-up labeling requirement...whatever that may be.


----------



## Outdoor2daCore (Nov 8, 2010)

Magnet said:


> Wow. So many think that you can just ignore the rules and then only deserve warnings for doing so.
> 
> Sorry, but I just don't understand that kind of thinking.
> 
> ...


Magnet, 

That is not what I meant at all. I wish our state had more COs! Their is too much violating going on and I do agree they broke the law. But... A COs job is to protect the states resources. The name and address law is to identify tip ups and help count legal attended lines. If he was out there with two lines in the water and two tip up between himself, his wife, and two kids, honestly how is that damaging the resource or doing any harm. By him ticketing them he is leaving a sour taste with that entire family and the many people I am sure they will tell whom will agree. 400$ for unmarked tip ups is crap. 



TK81 said:


> Maybe, but I think most CO's would have used this as a teaching moment. Perhaps this experience will taint the kid's perception of CO's.
> 
> I wasn't there and we don't know exactly the situation or attitudes the CO had to deal with; it just seems harsh to me. Just my opinion. I also tend to question laws that don't make sense. Perhaps there is a perfectly logical and necessary reason for the tip-up labeling requirement...whatever that may be.


Exactly!!! The teaching moment would make up for the cost of the ticket's 10x by good behavior and positive press for the DNR. I'm 29 now and a big fan of COs doing their job right. I know a few and they are great people with a tough job. My birthday is in August, when I turned 17 my mother bought me my first license. Not knowing any better, I thought it expired in August of the following year. So in May the next year, I was fishing Steelhead and a prominent NW MI CO stopped to talk to me. He found out my license was expired and explained the rules to me. Thankfully, I was in a small town with a bait shop so, he walked me up the street and let me buy a license and I was on my way. I'll never forget that and will always have positive things to say about COs and our MI DNR. Ever since then, I read the rule books religiously and don't break the laws, no matter how tempting. Also, this certain individual won CO of the year for MI many years. He's now a county Sherriff and a helluva a guy who did way more good from not ticketing me then to make a few bucks for the state. Honestly, if I were the kids and we received that ticket I would say the hell with the DNR and violate and poach to spite them, if you really want to it's not hard, there is just simply not enough around these days. Which is one of the reasons our resources are depleted so bad. My .15 cents.


----------



## Magnet (Mar 2, 2001)

I have to respectfully disagree.

I think the kids got a good "teaching moment" from the C.O. They were taught that when Dad breaks the law he will get in trouble. Life lesson.

I'd rather the kids learn that it is *not* okay to push the boundaries of the law.

If everyone were to be granted leniency because their kids are with them, the kids would soon pick up on the fact that the laws aren't enforced. I don't want to share the rivers, lakes, woods or roads with those same kids years later when they feel like the laws don't pertain to them because they deem the laws to be "insignificant". 

It seems that this is the trend now days with our younger generations. This thread might be proof of that, as well as other threads like the one's that refer to ATV helmet usage and doubling up on 1 up ATV's. Yes it is against the law, but there are those that will come on to this forum and say it's ok because they haven't got into trouble for it......... yet.


----------



## tightlineyellowline (Mar 11, 2014)

Magnet said:


> I have to respectfully disagree.
> 
> I think the kids got a good "teaching moment" from the C.O. They were taught that when Dad breaks the law he will get in trouble. Life lesson.
> 
> ...


As stated above from me I was fully educated about the rules when my incident happened and my son was with me.
At every question I was asked I was very respectful to the officer and I also told my son to pay attention when the officer was writing it that there are times when you 'man up '
and except what you done wrong 
To take the consequences like a man not a mouthy smart a** 
And by the way the officer came back one hour later and took my ticket back . And my son is now friends with this officer 
So I personally tell everybody that bad mouths him behind his back that he is one of the best CO s the state has And he does not know I do that either. 
So show them respect. And get in return. They deal with people lying to them daily. Honesty is kinda refreshing to them I think


----------



## Loryn's Dad (Jul 9, 2009)

I have had friends who fought tickets only to get the prices reduced. People will tell you that "ignorance is no excuse" but if they take it to court, don't have any other "priors", explain they were having a family day, the judge could show some leniency. Nothing to lose if they try.


----------



## jimbo (Dec 29, 2007)

TK81 said:


> Perhaps this experience will taint the kid's perception of CO's.


that'll all depends on Dad's reaction. 
the CO may have ticketed him because he had a bad perception of Dad


----------



## TK81 (Mar 28, 2009)

jimbo said:


> that'll all depends on Dad's reaction.
> the CO may have ticketed him because he had a bad perception of Dad


Right on Jimbo, my next paragraph in my previous post explains that we were not there and do not know the attitudes or tenor of the conversation between the CO and the dad (or the kids for that matter).

And to Magnet, I respect your opinion as well, I just disagree with it. I am not a fan of "absolutes" in all cases. I'd like to make an analogy to the idiocy of the "zero tolerance" policies that have made a mess of discipline in the school systems. Kids get suspended for some pretty silly stuff. You can't believe that this system is better that what we had when I was a kid in the 60's and 70's.


----------



## stampman (Dec 30, 2003)

do we know the verbal exchange between the officer and the fisherman. a buddy of mine was getting a warning from and officer, when he started to run his mouth. Warning turn into a ticket.


----------



## UncleNorby (Mar 11, 2013)

My take on this is the CO likely turned fishermen and potential future fishermen into non-fishermen. Nothing like biting the hand that feeds...


----------



## Burksee (Jan 15, 2003)

taizer said:


> know the rules if you fish. The officer cant just just give every person that doesn't know what their doing a warning. It doesn't work like that, rules are rules












....regardless the situation ignorance is no excuse when you break the law.


----------



## BryPaulD (May 30, 2009)

I agree with the ticket... Not the price though.. 200 a piece, really? Isn't that more than over limit possession? Gosh, if my wife and I and two kids were out and we had 8 unmarked tip ups out... There goes the mortgage


----------



## lreigler (Dec 23, 2009)

BryPaulD said:


> I agree with the ticket... Not the price though.. 200 a piece, really? Isn't that more than over limit possession? Gosh, if my wife and I and two kids were out and we had 8 unmarked tip ups out... There goes the mortgage


That was exactly my thoughts. That's ridiculous. 

posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire


----------



## brookie1 (Jan 26, 2011)

BryPaulD said:


> I agree with the ticket... Not the price though.. 200 a piece, really? Isn't that more than over limit possession? Gosh, if my wife and I and two kids were out and we had 8 unmarked tip ups out... There goes the mortgage


There are no set fines. The ticket is a misdemeanor and is processed by the court of jurisdiction for the county the ticket was written in. The judge will set the fine and/or jail time when pleaded/found guilty. Most game law violations have a max of 90 days and/or 500 fine although this might be a 30 day misdemeanor. I couldn't quite understand the MCLs on that one.


----------



## triplelunger (Dec 21, 2009)

Magnet said:


> I have to respectfully disagree.
> 
> I think the kids got a good "teaching moment" from the C.O. They were taught that when Dad breaks the law he will get in trouble. Life lesson.
> 
> ...


So you'd be pretty pissed if you were pulled over for going 5 over, and all you got was a warning.


----------



## steve myers (Dec 29, 2000)

BryPaulD said:


> I agree with the ticket... Not the price though.. 200 a piece, really? Isn't that more than over limit possession? Gosh, if my wife and I and two kids were out and we had 8 unmarked tip ups out... There goes the mortgage


I saw one post on it being 195.00 does anybody else know what it is?That might be it but sounds like quite a bit.


----------



## GVDocHoliday (Sep 5, 2003)

A trick my future BIL has employed is swapping all of his flags out with past tag soup. Old hunting licenses that have all of his information on them. They're water proof and and very durable. He hasn't moved in several years.


----------



## ibthetrout (Sep 24, 2003)

river rat78 said:


> As for the question about why you need names on tip ups. It's to help identify whose lines they are. The co needs to know what tip ups belong to who especially when there are several tip ups out and multiple people fishing. In this case there was 4.


The law states the owners name must be on the tipup, not the person using it. That does not necessarily help them find who is fishing with it. I have several tipups all with my name on them because I own them. I always have extras for my friends to use when they fish with me. It's all legal too.


----------



## river rat78 (Dec 30, 2010)

ibthetrout said:


> The law states the owners name must be on the tipup, not the person using it. That does not necessarily help them find who is fishing with it. I have several tipups all with my name on them because I own them. I always have extras for my friends to use when they fish with me. It's all legal too.


I sent an email to the DNR asking specifically if a friend can use my tip up with my information on it. The response was it needs to have their information on it if they are using it.


----------



## DXT Deer Slayer (Nov 14, 2009)

The CO that I talked to a couple weeks ago said that names should be on tip-ups largely so that they can find their way back to the owner should he forget one out on the ice.


----------



## river rat78 (Dec 30, 2010)

DXT Deer Slayer said:


> The CO that I talked to a couple weeks ago said that names should be on tip-ups largely so that they can find their way back to the owner should he forget one out on the ice.


I think it serves more than one purpose.


----------



## chesirerodandgunclub (Nov 12, 2012)

See a couple different answers on this. Anyone know for sure whose name needs to be on the tip up? I have four, all with my name and always let a buddy use a couple.


----------



## wildcoy73 (Mar 2, 2004)

Rule book states owners name must be fastened or written on tip up. Does not say user.


----------



## TK81 (Mar 28, 2009)

Another law that appears to be up to the officer as to how to interpret. Not good. Law should be re-written or trashed. And if re-written, shouldn't the $195.00 fine be revisited? Are we supposed to label slammers? How about minnow rods that I leave in a wire holder with the bail open and a bobber. This is one of my preferred methods when I am perch fishing. Isn't this pretty much the same as a tip-up? 

I see a lot of guys saying "read the rule book". Then I see a bunch of guys that read the rule book and still disagree.

The OP was using no label tip-ups. Definitely against the rules. Even if the rule as written blows. I think that rule has been pretty the same in the rule book for at 40 years or so. Selective CO enforcement...mostly just resulting in an education and request for compliance. And a very punitive fine for an insignificant transgression. And don't tell me its not insignificant, because otherwise the CO's would enforce 100% of the time.


----------



## river rat78 (Dec 30, 2010)

Honestly if you use an ice slammer, jaw jacker, automatic fisherman, anything other than the wire rod holder I would put my name and address on to be on the safe side. All I did was print out several copies of my information and used clear packaging tape. So far I've had no issues with it.


----------



## TK81 (Mar 28, 2009)

All my tip-ups and slammers are labeled. Always have been as I know that is the law. 

It just sounds like we have selective enforcement of a law that may serve no purpose.


----------



## pickle252 (Dec 24, 2013)

triplelunger said:


> So you'd be pretty pissed if you were pulled over for going 5 over, and all you got was a warning.


Nice!!!!!! LMAO. Some people just can't seem to get down off the soapbox.


----------



## WALLEYE MIKE (Jan 7, 2001)

chesirerodandgunclub said:


> See a couple different answers on this. Anyone know for sure whose name needs to be on the tip up? I have four, all with my name and always let a buddy use a couple.





wildcoy73 said:


> Rule book states owners name must be fastened or written on tip up. Does not say user.





TK81 said:


> Another law that appears to be up to the officer as to how to interpret. Not good. Law should be re-written or trashed. And if re-written, shouldn't the $195.00 fine be revisited? Are we supposed to label slammers? How about minnow rods that I leave in a wire holder with the bail open and a bobber. This is one of my preferred methods when I am perch fishing. Isn't this pretty much the same as a tip-up?
> 
> I see a lot of guys saying "read the rule book". Then I see a bunch of guys that read the rule book and still disagree.
> 
> The OP was using no label tip-ups. Definitely against the rules. Even if the rule as written blows. I think that rule has been pretty the same in the rule book for at 40 years or so. Selective CO enforcement...mostly just resulting in an education and request for compliance. And a very punitive fine for an insignificant transgression. And don't tell me its not insignificant, because otherwise the CO's would enforce 100% of the time.


Up until about 3 or 4 years ago the law stated "owners name" but the rule book had "anglers name". I told Kelly Smith about it and he got it changed in the rule book to reflect what the law as written says.

It is the OWNERS name that goes on the tip up, slammer or any other similar apparatus.


----------



## WELDINGROD (Oct 11, 2009)

river rat78 said:


> I sent an email to the DNR asking specifically if a friend can use my tip up with my information on it. The response was it needs to have their information on it if they are using it.


Good to know... thanks for posting that.


----------



## WELDINGROD (Oct 11, 2009)

TK81 said:


> All my tip-ups and slammers are labeled. Always have been as I know that is the law.
> 
> It just sounds like we have selective enforcement of a law that may serve no purpose.


agreed.... too much room for interpretation and the reason behind it is not respected so it should be written more specifically to match the intention. 
I can't imagine being charged $600 + court costs and having to go to court for using three tip ups (well within legal numbers), because a CO said my labeling was not to regulation or something along those lines. Don't get me wrong if you do the crime you need to pay the fine. I don't see a crime, but that is not up to me to decide. Can't say that Don said it was ok when the CO shows up :evilsmile 

If they want to have a petty rule about labeling format (when there is no question about legal number of lines) then the fine should not be so high, that can ruin a family's entire fishing season! If the angler has an illegal number of lines out, then I think the fine should be huge, but again not my place to decide these things... 

best approach is to do the best you can to respect the rules of the fishery and to the letter of the rules put out each year, best chance to keep their hands off you!


----------



## brookie1 (Jan 26, 2011)

The actual law:

*324.48703 Fishing means or device; lines; hooks; **tip-up** or similar device; spear, bow and arrow, or crossbow; order to regulate nets.*
Sec. 48703.

(1) A person shall not take, catch, or kill or attempt to take, catch, or kill a fish in the waters of this state with a grab hook, snag hook, or gaff hook, by the use of a set or night line or a net or firearm or an explosive substance or combination of substances that have a tendency to kill or stupefy fish, or by any other means or device other than a single line or a single rod and line while held in the hand or under immediate control, and with a hook or hooks attached, baited with a natural or artificial bait while being used for still fishing, ice fishing, casting, or trolling for fish, which is a means of the fish taking the bait or hook in the mouth. A person shall not use more than 3 single lines or 3 single rods and lines, or a single line and a single rod and line, and shall not attach more than 6 hooks on all lines. The department shall have the authority to decrease the number of rods per angler. However, the department shall not reduce the number of rods per angler to less than 2. For the purposes of this part, a hook is a single, double, or treble pointed hook. A hook, single, double, or treble pointed, attached to a manufactured artificial bait shall be counted as 1 hook. The department may designate waters where a treble hook and an artificial bait or lure having more than 1 single pointed hook shall not be used during the periods the department designates. In the Great Lakes or recognized smelt waters, any numbers of hooks, attached to a single line, may be used for the taking of smelt, alewife, or other bait fish.

(2) A person shall not set or use a tip-up or other similar device for the purpose of taking fish through the ice unless the name and address of the person owning the tip-up or other similar device is marked in legible English on the tip-up or other similar device or securely fastened to it by a plate or tag.

(3) The department may issue an order to regulate the taking of fish with a spear, bow and arrow, or crossbow in the waters of this state.

(4) The department may issue an order to regulate the taking of fish with nets in the waters of this state.


And the penalties:

*324.48738 Violations as misdemeanors; violation as felony; penalties.*

Sec. 48738.
(1) A person who violates this part or rules or orders issued to implement this part, if a penalty is not otherwise provided for that violation in this section, is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment for not more than 90 days or a fine of not more than $500.00, or both.

(2) A person convicted of using dynamite, nitroglycerin, lime, electricity, any other explosive substance, or poison for the purpose of taking or killing fish, convicted of using nets not authorized by law for taking game fish, or convicted of buying or selling game fish or any parts of game fish is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment for not more than 90 days or a fine of not less than $250.00 or more than $1,000.00, or both.

(3) A person who takes or possesses sturgeon in violation of this part or rules or orders issued to implement this part is guilty of a misdemeanor and shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than 30 days or more than 180 days and a fine of not less than $500.00 or more than $2,000.00, or both, and the costs of prosecution.

(4) A person who knowingly violates section 48735(2) or (4) or a permit issued under section 48735(2) or (4) with respect to a genetically engineered variant of a fish species is guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment for not more than 5 years or a fine of not more than $250,000.00, or both. In addition, the person is liable for any damages to the natural resources resulting from the violation, including, but not limited to, costs incurred to prevent or minimize such damages.

(5) If a person is convicted of a violation of this part or rules or orders issued to implement this part and it is alleged in the complaint and proved or admitted at trial or ascertained by the court at the time of sentencing that the person has been previously convicted 3 or more times of a violation of this part within the 5 years immediately preceding the last violation of this part, the person is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment for not more than 90 days or a fine of not more than $1,000.00, or both, and the costs of prosecution. This subsection does not apply to the following violations:
(a) Failing to possess or display a valid fishing license or trout and salmon license issued pursuant to part 435.
(b) Taking or possessing an overlimit of bluegill, sunfish, crappie, perch, or nongame fish.
(c) Taking or possessing not more than 5 undersized fish.
(d) Fishing with too many lines.
(e) Failing to attach the person's name and address to tip-ups or minnow traps.
(f) Fishing with lines not under immediate control.

(6) In addition to the penalties provided in this section, a fishing license issued to a person sentenced pursuant to subsection (2), (3), (4), or (5) shall be revoked, and the person shall not be issued a license during the remainder of the year in which convicted or during the next 3 succeeding license years.


----------



## Amos (Jan 19, 2015)

FYI - I called a regional office to ask if a "Jaw-Jacker" is considered a tip-up or just a rod holder. This person said, to be safe and avoid any hassle, they should be treated as a tip-up. This would include slammers, automatic fisherman, and any such device that may be set out in a spread. He stated that it would clarify any confusion when fishing in groups with others fishing tip-ups.


----------

