May be we can resolve the snagging issue once and for all. I am sure many of you already knew this but here it goes.

I spoke with someone in WDFW legal services about snagging and this is what I was told:

Snagging fish intentionally is illegal in any (Salt/Fresh) water.

Salt water:
In salt water if you have a fish with snagged marks on the body, you are legal but not in fresh water. My comments: I think in salt water they give you the benefit of the doubt that you were not intentionally snagging.

Fresh water:
If you are not intentionally snagging and have a fish which is hooked gill-plate forward (he used the term "head" also) including under the mouth, you are legal. Body shots are out of question.

I think Dave Jackson summarized it very well in "snagged fish on the cover" thread (2/01/02). He wrote:

"This discussion in the past has come up with one clear fact: the Washington angling laws have a loophole that allows someone to potentially floss a fish or snag it in the head (if there is a difference) as long as the hook hits the gill-plate or forward. This does not mean that a game officer cannot give you a ticket if the officer feels that you tried to snag (or floss) the fish. And that doesn't mean that you cannot be pissed about it either way."

When I asked about the definition of "snagging" on page 13 of WDFW sport fishing rules which clearly indicates "hook(s) must be in the mouth", he added that sometimes in the process of taking your lure, the fish is hooked outside the mouth (due to hook set and other timing related issues) and they allow that as long as it is gill-plate forward but he would not call it a "loophole".

Following is my comment only:
"Pitch Pocket" also had it right. If you are not intentionally snagging and happen to hook a fish gill-plate forward you are legal but if an enforcement officer is watching you and he disagrees with you then it will be a legal battle and ....

Another comment:
Also flossing or lining is not "voluntarily taking the lure" so it is ILLIGAL in the mouth or outside the mouth. If you do it and get away with it is not the issue here. I am just posting what I learned based on my discussion with him.

I don't want to post the contact person's name and phone number in case he gets flooded with phone calls. He was very nice and took time to explain things. If you need the name and phone number send me a private message. I forgot to ask him about posting his name and phone number and he may not like that. Look at previous "snagging" threads and you may find his name. Thasnks to "Pitch Pocket".

Hook marks on the body? Is he kidding? Hel[, on the Wind and Qulicene rivers, for example, many of the fish are decorated like Christmas trees. Some have a half-dozen snag wounds in them. If I fair-hook one of these fish......he's getting the stick and we'll see what a judge says if I get a ticket. I won't be held responsible for somebody else's misdeeds.

UltimateFeashKacher

Good post, I am glad you clarified this so now maybe the snagging war threads can end. But probably not

The only part that bothers me is the part where you stated ". This does not mean that a game officer cannot give you a ticket if the officer feels that you tried to snag (or floss) the fish."

I like the laws to be more black and white and I do not like the fact that certain parts of it can be left up to an officer’s judgment. If someone flosses a fish, and if it is legal to keep, how does the officer know if that person flossed the fish on purpose or not?

Dan

You got it right!

Cowlitzfisherman

Is the taste of the bait worth the sting of the hook????

I better correct this before it gets out of hand.

Dan S,

About body marks, I kind of added that and expanded on it. He said "snagging body" is illegal but he did not say about no marks on the body. I am going to edit the post and take my commentary off. Sorry about that. Thanks.

You brought up a good point which I did not discuss with him and I may give him another call with this question: If you fair catch a fish with fresh? snagged mark on the body in fresh water, is it legal to keep to that fish? Now that becomes a bit technical!

Lead Thrower,

He did not discuss if an officer is watching you and disagrees with you what is going to happen. I assumed if an officer is watching you and disagrees with you then it will be like any other legal battle. Unfortunately no law is black and white.

If you choose to plead not guilty the judge is going to listen to the officers report on the infraction which will state that you were cited for keeping a fish not hooked in the mouth i.e. snagged by the definition of written law. You will wave around a copy of the e-mail....which sure does seem vague and indecisive...and is only a lawyers opinion of the way the law is enforced. The judge will then review the law. Unless you have case precedents supporting your claim....you will fork over $500.
A judge can only go by the way the law is written. Case closed. Thank You All.

gooose

UFK

Thanks for bringing up the topic.

The "Flossing" method of taking fish is becoming an issue here in infamous Northern California.

I imagine you have seen this practice in your area for a while. Here on the Upper Klamath, I have seen it come about in just the last two years. Although North of me, on the Rogue River in Oregon, it is the preferred technique for taking Salmon by 95% of "drift fisherman". The "springers" on the upper Rouge are not biters, so this technique as we all know, works very well for fish that are stacked. And most of the fisherman actually believe that they are landing fish that willingly took the hook.

I've been sharing ideas and remedies with one of our local wardens. He is aware of what is happening and is actually working with the regulators to alter the tackle regulations in the uppper river. The typical Flossing setup here is 30# mainline, 1oz.+ sliding wieght, 8+ feet of 20# leader, 1-2 small corkies, and a 3/0 or better hook. The reg changes would entail: a maximum leader length of 36", and wieght must be hard tied, and can be on a dropper no longer than the leader.(or a variation of the same) In my opinion, the legal fisherman, boat and bank, would not be affected by these regs. And I feel it would greatly discourage the snagging in the mouth techique. (Realize it would be a limited time and area restriction). Don't get me wrong I hate more regs. Its nearly impossible to fully understand our salmon regs. Even the wardens get confused.

Have you had any regulations created to address this problem? I only ask because we fight very similar fishery battles here, as you do. Even though we are vastly different States. Any thoughts would be appreciated.

YoungManRiver
Klamath River, CA

Did you ask them about gear? What are they going to do to someone using 40 lb test and huge treble hooks? I just don't understand the sport in snagging fish. I found some huge snagging hooks up on the Quilcene.

Great subject, with well thought out statements. It seems mostly pointed at flossing, as the pure (*%##@^) snagger is pretty obviouse in the technic they are employing. On the other hand I free drifted below blue creek for the first ime this year, and the terminal gear was pretty much the same as a flooser might use. Slip weight and a 6 ft leader with a double hook set up #4's. we hooked 4 fish and boated 2. the 2 we boated were hooked in the mouth. To be honest with you, they could have been hooked in the outer corner of the mouth. I don' remember. But it seems if I go buy the letter of the law, I would be OK as long as the hooks were forward of the gill plates. Comments?

Gooose,
You have a very valid point. How will the judge know that page 13 snagging rule (in the mouth) has an expanded definition which is not written anywhere in the regs? Maybe the enforcement officers know the gill-plate forward rule and they won't ticket you unless they think you are trying to intentionally snag or line a fish. I am going to ask him about this scenario. I also have couple other question including Dan S. question. I will post when I get the answers.

YoungManRiver,
I am not aware of any regulations to discourage flossing in WA but I haven't read the entire rules either.

RK,
Gill-plate forward with no intend to snag is what I was told.
I think it comes down to the fact that the law can not be very black and white. For example as YoungManRiver said, if I see someone with a very long leader in a same stacked up pool casting and casting and casting ..., I may think that he is trying to line them. You can also line with shorter leaders but it is more difficult in deeper waters. That is where the enforcement officer has to make a judgement and decide what the "intention" is. It may become somewhat subjective. I usually know when I am lining a fish, I can feel it. If you know what you are doing is illegal and you care about being legal then don't do it. If you want to catch a fish at any cost, well, you have to live with it and also face the consequences if you get caught.

One thing to keep in mind most of the members posting on this board are pretty die hard steel headers.

When I first came to this board I had been steel heading for many years but had never heard the term flossing. I had steelhead fished with only one partner at that time. Now I am a whore and fish with many people. My fishing buddy and myself learned everything on our own, or by a conversation with another angler on the river.

At that time during low water conditions I used to use a six-foot leader, size one hook and a single small corkie. If I did ever floss a fish I had know idea because I had never heard of that term and thought the fish just got hooked outside the mouth during the bite.

I posted a question on this forum about leader length and stated that I used a six-foot leader during low water conditions and was informed about flossing. Now during low water conditions I use a maximum of a four-foot leader.

Anyway the entire point is I am not defending flossers I am just saying maybe some of them do not even know they are flossing fish. Thus they have heard through the grape vine “anything in the head is legal” and now they get stopped by an officer who is about to write them a ticket for something they thought was legal.

Wow, you mean I actually posted something more than frivolous? Must have been a rare moment of lucidity for me.

What it allllllllll comes down to is intent. The officer needs to prove that you intended to snag the fish. And when it comes down to a he said/she said between you and the officer, I'm afraid that the officer is going to usually win that one.

Gooose, I think you assume incorrectly about the justice system. The judge does not necessarily read the law and interpret it as gospel. If he did that, we wouldn't need a judge. The guy in the robe is supposed to listen to the evidence and make a decision based on that evidence. If you present the governing bodies opinion as evidence, you should get consideration for it.

Case precedents don't just appear out of thin air, they are set by the very process one is involved with when someone gets a ticket and has his case heard by a judge.

They may not win anyway, because maybe he is a snagging SOB and deserve the $500 ticket. But for the normal Joe that is wrongly accused, a respectful and factual defense can definitely result in dismissal. Alot depends on your manners and your presentation.

Pitch Pocket

Have you ever been to court in front of a judge? I had this experience once; you are GUILTY until you can prove yourself INNOCENT. Sometimes proving yourself innocent is difficult even if you truly did nothing wrong.

Yes, I have been in front of a judge. Not many times, but I'm batting .500. Like I said, you won't win them all, but I play golf with enough lawyers to know how to present myself and my case to give myself a chance.

Pitch Pocket

Maybe I should have taken up golf, I am sure I could have learned more about the law after 18 holes of talking to an attorney then my public defender did in law school.

We all know when someone is trying to snag a damn fish. Don't we? Game wardens should know too.
The guy who shows up in a drift fishing line and is setting the hook on every rock.
The guy that chases the wakes going up river and shortlines them.
The guy throwing gear at dark reeling in and trying to snag in salmon holes.
We have seen these guys!
These guys need to be busted and it should be considered poaching!!!!!!!!!!
I belive snaging a fish and foul hooking a fish are two different subjects.
In the salt water you tend to foul hook fish because they are going for your offering. Or they are trying to slap the $hit out of the bait.
I feel the same is true in freshwater.
The poachers (snaggers) need to be busted ,not the foul hooked fish.
I don't belive all foul hooked fish should be released if legal to keep.
It goes back to what General Zog sayed about catching all the biters in a system.Over time all the biters(genetics) will be fished out of a system.
If fished for legally it should taken as a foul hooked fish and not a snagged fish.
The nets are considered legal!
Nuff said,
Rivernut

In my experience, a lawyer's worth to you is in a direct relationship with what you pay them. Free advise is usually worth........nothing. Public defenders are generally not the creme of the crop.

RK

You said it was your first time down on the Cow earlier this year.

If you keep showing up, you will see the guys who are boondogging effectively, run the 6 foot leaders. That also does not mean they were using 15# test, etc. Boondoggin' properly is a beautiful thing to watch down where you mentioned, but more goes into it than just 6 foot leaders.

Pitch peace...I don't think I assumed anything incorrectedly about the legal system....yes the judge will give consideration to anything relevant you may wish to present. but it still comes to what is written as law. He needs only ask you and the officer one question...only one very simple question...where was the fish hooked? In the mouth or not? Now there's no written definition in the reg's so then you revert to what ever source of common accepted definitions the court uses...Websters dictionary for instance. As for Mr. Jacoby's e-mail and his apparent followup to ultimate...I think the judge will have some sympathy for you receiving poor advice from a lawyer. Ultimate when you talk to him how about asking for letter signed by him specically stating that the gill plate forward thing is either the intent of the law as written or just someones policy or guidelines? these are not law. Please scan and post this reply showing his signature? Sure would hate for you or any other honest citizen to cough up $500 and potentially lose your gear...and I'm not flamin on this one!

gooose