# Drones Used to Catch "Fillet & Release" Fishermen



## Mechanicaldawg (Aug 5, 2013)

http://www.bradenton.com/2013/08/04/4643516/outdoors-authorities-using-drones.html


----------



## STRAIGHTARROW (Aug 5, 2013)

Holy crap. 
Might have to moon 'em.


----------



## mlbowfin (Aug 6, 2013)

big brother just got bigger..


----------



## Salt H2O Scout (Aug 6, 2013)

*Ooooops*

You have to be careful what you and the Mrs. do when the fishing goes slack......................................


----------



## grouper throat (Aug 7, 2013)

Scare tactic possibly? I'll play devils advocate. What about chunking the filets once the FWC flags you down? No possession- the filets sink.

I'm sure I'm not the only one who has realized they're carrying "illegal" baitfish in the livewell as other ppl don't seem to think about bait having a size limit until green jeans is in the area lol (seabass). Thank God they never snoop around the livewell much.


----------



## oops1 (Aug 7, 2013)

This is just too much!!


----------



## j_seph (Aug 7, 2013)

Salt H2O Scout said:


> You have to be careful what you and the Mrs. do when the fishing goes slack......................................


Hmmm sounds like a government video that could go viral


----------



## ryanwhit (Aug 7, 2013)

I'm not sure I believe it.  This type of technology, though it definitely exists, is extremely expensive.  How expensive?  Well, I don't know...But my BIL, who is a helicopter pilot in the Army SF, says that it is very difficult for them to get such real-time data by means of drones, satellites, etc.  It is an extreme rarity even in wartime when mission objectives and American lives are on the line.

I've only heard the "friend of a friend" line too.  Until someone I know gets caught, I don't buy it.


----------



## ghadarits (Aug 7, 2013)

*Drones*

I wouldn’t say that a drone would be out of the question. There are some very affordable options available now. We rep for a company that has a heck of a drone that has very surprising capabilities. 2000ft altitude line of site remote controls and 25x zoom remote video feed. I'm holding the camera in the pic. All for about $10K and you can be spying on whoever you want. Some of the states PoPo departments have them already but I'm not at liberty to say which ones. I would like to have one for scouting ducks.


----------



## STRAIGHTARROW (Aug 7, 2013)

Back in April Gov. Scott signed into law that drones can not be used by law enforcement to spy on citizens without a warrant.

http://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.co...-signs-anti-drone-bill-into-law/#.UchYGr0o6cw

From the same site listed by the OP:
"A drone could be operated by the Coast Guard, the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission or the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Any of the three can give a ticket for a federal fishery violation, and in fact, the NOAA pays the FWC to enforce federal fishery regulations."

So how's that gonna work out for FWC?


----------



## ghadarits (Aug 7, 2013)

*The Po Po and their drones.*

And the NSA can't read our emails or record phone conversations either. 

As long as they aren’t targeting a certain person when they launch but are just doing general surveillance then they aren’t breaking the law. Once they determine you are engaged in suspect activity they have probable cause. Just like getting pulled over if you are weaving while driving at 2:00am. You might not have directly broken any law but you have given them probable cause to pull you over drunk or not.


----------



## STRAIGHTARROW (Aug 7, 2013)

Fla. SB92 prohibits any law enforcement agency from using unmanned drones to gather evidence or other information without a warrant.  It reads, in part:  ”A law enforcement agency may not use a drone to gather evidence or other information.”

What reasons are applicable under "general surveillance" drone usage? Not trying to argue, just don't see how they can get around that. When they use a drone to "determine you are engaged in suspect activity" they are in fact, gathering information or evidence.


----------



## d-a (Aug 7, 2013)

STRAIGHTARROW said:


> Back in April Gov. Scott signed into law that drones can not be used by law enforcement to spy on citizens without a warrant.
> 
> http://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.co...-signs-anti-drone-bill-into-law/#.UchYGr0o6cw
> 
> ...



The FWC will be working as a federal agent not a state agent in that case. They have a dual status, that's what helps fund them.

d-a


----------



## STRAIGHTARROW (Aug 7, 2013)

So in this situation, Federal law would trump State law and the FWC would be representing the Fed's in a court case?

I would assume that it would have to be tried in a federal court since it would be a federal violation.


----------



## d-a (Aug 7, 2013)

STRAIGHTARROW said:


> So in this situation, Federal law would trump State law and the FWC would be representing the Fed's in a court case?



Yes they will be acting as a federal agent, and most likely if this was to happen it would not be in state waters. 

d-a


----------



## bhdawgs (Aug 7, 2013)

I know a guy who got caught like this back in the Spring.  They actually came to his house and wrote him a ticket...


----------



## d-a (Aug 8, 2013)

bhdawgs said:


> I know a guy who got caught like this back in the Spring.  They actually came to his house and wrote him a ticket...



That's odd, generally they want to confiscate the fillets and determine the exact species that was illegally kept. 

Your still allowed a small amount (@1.5lbs) of cleaned fish onboard per person provided you have a means to cook it. 

d-a


----------



## ssiredfish (Aug 8, 2013)

d-a said:


> That's odd, generally they want to confiscate the fillets and determine the exact species that was illegally kept.
> 
> Your still allowed a small amount (@1.5lbs) of cleaned fish onboard per person provided you have a means to cook it.
> 
> d-a



Where are you gettin a number for this weight?  The way it was explained to me was that it was basically wide open as to size and quantity given the fact it was for consumption on board.....


----------



## STRAIGHTARROW (Aug 8, 2013)

bhdawgs said:


> I know a guy who got caught like this back in the Spring.  They actually came to his house and wrote him a ticket...



Can you provide any more information? What was the ticket for? Was it FWC who wrote it? What was the outcome/fine?
Was this (supposed) offense in federal or state waters?


----------



## STRAIGHTARROW (Aug 8, 2013)

ssiredfish...
Page 10 of the federal regulations under head and fins attached rule specify's 1-1/2 pounds of fish per person.


----------



## Limitless (Aug 8, 2013)

ssiredfish said:


> Where are you gettin a number for this weight?  The way it was explained to me was that it was basically wide open as to size and quantity given the fact it was for consumption on board.....



That is Florida law - in the FWC Regs.  Only in FL waters.  You have to have a grill on board or a galley with stove, but you might get by with a fryer operated off an inverter.


----------



## STRAIGHTARROW (Aug 8, 2013)

It's in federal regulations...scroll down to page 10, Head and Find Attached rule.
http://www.gulfcouncil.org/Beta/GMFMCWeb/downloads/Recreational Regs Brochure.pdf


----------



## bhdawgs (Aug 8, 2013)

STRAIGHTARROW said:


> Can you provide any more information? What was the ticket for? Was it FWC who wrote it? What was the outcome/fine?
> Was this (supposed) offense in federal or state waters?




It was for illegally cleaning snapper in Federal waters.  They had a video of him, got the boat registration information from the video and came to his house.   Wrote him a ticket and a fine.   Crazy, I know..... scary too.


----------



## ryanwhit (Aug 8, 2013)

bhdawgs said:


> It was for illegally cleaning snapper in Federal waters.  They had a video of him, got the boat registration information from the video and came to his house.   Wrote him a ticket and a fine.   Crazy, I know..... scary too.



Did they take flesh samples from the filets??  If not, how did they determine for sure it was red snapper?


----------



## d-a (Aug 8, 2013)

ryanwhit said:


> Did they take flesh samples from the filets??  If not, how did they determine for sure it was red snapper?



Or that it wasn't consumed at sea? 

Ryan next time you see me ask me about the drones from my last deployment. 

d-a


----------



## ssiredfish (Aug 9, 2013)

STRAIGHTARROW said:


> It's in federal regulations...scroll down to page 10, Head and Find Attached rule.
> http://www.gulfcouncil.org/Beta/GMFMCWeb/downloads/Recreational Regs Brochure.pdf



Thats for the Gulf though, I dont recall seein any regs specified for this in the Atlantic......


----------



## ryanwhit (Aug 9, 2013)

d-a said:


> Or that it wasn't consumed at sea?
> 
> Ryan next time you see me ask me about the drones from my last deployment.
> 
> d-a



10-4.

Got both motor issues worked out.  A bolt had fallen down in the shift shaft hole on the cowling side, preventing the the movement of the shifter.  Loose positive battery cable on the other one.


----------



## How2fish (Aug 10, 2013)

Down south we call them skeet.....


----------



## Lukikus2 (Aug 10, 2013)

ghadarits said:


> I wouldn’t say that a drone would be out of the question. There are some very affordable options available now. We rep for a company that has a heck of a drone that has very surprising capabilities. 2000ft altitude line of site remote controls and 25x zoom remote video feed. I'm holding the camera in the pic. All for about $10K and you can be spying on whoever you want. Some of the states PoPo departments have them already but I'm not at liberty to say which ones. I would like to have one for scouting ducks.



What is the air time and control distance on those? Just wondering.


----------



## ted_BSR (Aug 12, 2013)

ryanwhit said:


> I'm not sure I believe it.  This type of technology, though it definitely exists, is extremely expensive.  How expensive?  Well, I don't know...But my BIL, who is a helicopter pilot in the Army SF, says that it is very difficult for them to get such real-time data by means of drones, satellites, etc.  It is an extreme rarity even in wartime when mission objectives and American lives are on the line.
> 
> I've only heard the "friend of a friend" line too.  Until someone I know gets caught, I don't buy it.




I am pretty sure you can buy a drone from Hobby Lobby for under $300.


----------



## dwhee87 (Aug 13, 2013)

I've got a friend who made his own for under $100. Range is about 1 kilometer, line of sight. He attached a go-pro camera to it, and launched it from a pontoon boat in Sunset Cove on Lanier, flew it around for 5 minutes videoing all the boats, then landed it back on his boat. He's working on another that will be GPS controlled using Google Maps. Biggest issue is flight time. His are electric, and the batteries needed for more than 5-10 minutes of flight get heavy, so he's got to overcome the lift issues. Just his hobby.


----------



## bfriendly (Aug 13, 2013)

STRAIGHTARROW said:


> Back in April Gov. Scott signed into law that drones can not be used by law enforcement to spy on citizens without a warrant.
> 
> http://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.co...-signs-anti-drone-bill-into-law/#.UchYGr0o6cw
> 
> ...



To spy would be more of an Intended target, rather than general surveillance would it not?
 Personally, I think this "Law" is just another Feel Good twist on words.............Patrolling is ok, but spying on someone is not...........

Patrolling the same person's route over an extended period of time would only be coincident


----------



## ryanwhit (Aug 13, 2013)

surely these line of sight and short flight time drones aren't the ones being used.  If you are breaking the law on the ocean and you see a boat pull up 1 kilometer away, you're probably going to keep your eye on them.  If they launch some kind of aircraft you would probably stop your illegal activity.

I may be wrong, but I just think these stories are a lot of bark with not much bite.


----------



## ryanwhit (Aug 13, 2013)

surely these line of sight and short flight time drones aren't the ones being used.  If you are breaking the law on the ocean and you see a boat pull up 1 kilometer away, you're probably going to keep your eye on them.  If they launch some kind of aircraft you would probably stop your illegal activity.

I may be wrong, but I just think these stories are a lot of bark with not much bite.


----------



## Dr. Strangelove (Aug 13, 2013)

ryanwhit said:


> surely these line of sight and short flight time drones aren't the ones being used.  If you are breaking the law on the ocean and you see a boat pull up 1 kilometer away, you're probably going to keep your eye on them.  If they launch some kind of aircraft you would probably stop your illegal activity.
> 
> I may be wrong, but I just think these stories are a lot of bark with not much bite.



Get it in the paper and probably stop a bunch of filleting just out of fear.

On the other side of the coin, what if I get my own drone and monitor the Feds on their boat? Bet they wouldn't like that too much...


----------



## Lukikus2 (Aug 13, 2013)

Wonton waste.

And filet and release is illegal.


----------



## Lukikus2 (Aug 13, 2013)

ryanwhit said:


> surely these line of sight and short flight time drones aren't the ones being used.  If you are breaking the law on the ocean and you see a boat pull up 1 kilometer away, you're probably going to keep your eye on them.  If they launch some kind of aircraft you would probably stop your illegal activity.
> 
> I may be wrong, but I just think these stories are a lot of bark with not much bite.



X 2

Binoculars are still frequently used. Lol


----------



## 2degrees (Aug 15, 2013)

I hate that they are going to start doing this..... that puts an end to me fishing naked.  Sounds like I will have to start using speedoos now instead.


----------



## Mako22 (Aug 16, 2013)

FWC in salt water is nothing more than the old Florida Marine patrol and the Marine patrol = a bunch of ego driven JERKS!!!!!! So the use of drones to spy on honest law abiding citizens does not surprise me. Too bad the Nazi thugs (Marine Patrol) didn't have this back in the 90's when they shut down honest commercial fisherman from making a living in Florida!


----------



## STRAIGHTARROW (Aug 16, 2013)

I questiond the Fishing Rights Alliance group...
http://www.thefra.org/
who have an ongoing site and specifically ask anyone who has received a citation from the FWC via them using a drone. Here is the reply I got...
"No responses. 
The only confirmed report is one that actually did happen in the keys sanctuary.
It was during the experimentation with the drone that FW see if it law-enforcement officials issued citations. Though I have not found out what the outcome of those citations is, I'm willing to bet that the charges will be dropped.
DFW see her since been told that no drones will be used for law enforcement without a warrant."
Denny O'Hern

So if anyone actually knows someone who received a citation from the FWC through the use of a drone, I would encourage them to consider letting FRA know.


----------



## Canyon (Aug 16, 2013)

Salt H2O Scout said:


> You have to be careful what you and the Mrs. do when the fishing goes slack......................................



Thats the first thing that popped into my head...the gov probably has a pretty good highlight reel of my lady and I!


----------



## BornToHuntAndFish (Aug 17, 2013)

Sounds like they want to use drones to enforce laws everywhere, but I hope they will not feel like they need to arm them with weapons.


----------



## roperdoc (Aug 17, 2013)

BornToHuntAndFish said:


> Sounds like they want to use drones to enforce laws everywhere, but I hope they will not feel like they need to arm them with weapons.



Not right away.


----------

