I had an interesting conversation yesterday with a guy at a marine beach. He had recently kept a fish caught off the beach that he had hooked forward of the gillplate, but not in the mouth. When leaving the beach, he was contacted by an inforcement officer who was not on duty and was told that it was lucky for him, the angler, that he, the warden, was not on duty, else he would have written him a ticket. The angler brought up that he thought the regulation now stated "forward of the gillplate." The officer reminded him that that regulation applied to fresh water.

The guy I was talking to works next to Fish and Wildlife and so he brought this up to some of the workers there. He said one of them went searching through the regulations and came to the conclusion that there is NO REGULATION stating that, in MARINE WATERS, a fish must be hooked in the mouth in order to be legally kept. The Fish and Wildlife worker was somewhat perplexed and referred this question to a Department lawyer, who came to the same conclusion. The guy I was talking to said that he obtained a signed statement to that effect from the lawyer.

I have fished the marine waters for 20 years and this never was an issue to me, I just assumed you had to hook a fish in the mouth to keep it. It was never even an issue in the deep waters, but we all complain of snaggers at places like Hoodsport. I think it would be remarkable if the regulations indeed do not even mention where a fish must be hooked in order to be legal. And if the regulations do not give fair notice of what is illegal, then it is not illegal, despite anyone's ethical opinions.

Can anyone cite a marine water regulation defining where a fish must be hooked in order to be legally kept? I'll admit I didn't go running to my regulations to check this out. You'd think something like this would be obvious, in plain language, and not take a thorough reading by a lawyer to come to the correct conclusion!

Here we go again!!! Let me weigh in first. If I'm out in the salt trolling and bring in a fish that by the time I get it to the boat it is "snagged" in say a fin. I bonk it. My reasoning is that the fish hit my lure and in the resulting fight the hook(s) slip from the mouth to the fin, well too bad, in my book it was a legal catch. This happens regularly with silvers thrashing on the surface.

If I get a ticket someday for this, so be it. I can't be responsible for th stupidity of others. While idiots worry about whether a fish intended(what a foolish concept... worrying about a fish's intention before I am allowed to stick a hook into it and then ultimately knock it over the head with a club) to bite my lure , the gillnetters continue to rape the resource.

Flame away! I can take it.

You are right about the silvers when they jump and roll the hook does sometimes come out of the mouth and gets hooked into any part of the fish. Personally I still treat it like a snagged fish and release it. I think the silvers are a good reason why the forward of the gill plate was inducted into the laws. If I could count how many silvers I have hooked in the rivers and have rolled and let the hook go and got them somewhere else. Personally a snagged fish is a snagged fish and would not keep it. If the hook comes out of the mouth then you lost the fish. If it ends up being snagged it is a snagged fish release it my .02

Thanks for the replies. I'm not trying to start a debate on ethics. I'm just trying to determine if, for MARINE WATERS, there is a definition IN THE REGULATIONS of where a fish must be hooked in order to be legally kept. If not, I think it's a bad oversight, especially if you could get a ticket written for it. If there is a definition, is it written in plain language somewhere, as it should be? Or does it require minute cross-referencing to conclude? If I have missed this topic in ealier threads, just let me know. Thanks, again.

Maybe it is not explicitly in the regulations, I have not looked. But the Revised Code of Washington seems fairly clear. These are direct quotes.

77.15.370. Unlawful recreational fishing in the first degree--Penalty

"(1) A person is guilty of unlawful recreational fishing in the first degree if:


(c) The person shoots, gaffs, SNAGS, snares, spears, dipnets, or stones fish or shellfish in state waters, or possesses fish or shellfish taken by such means, unless such means are authorized by express rule of the commission or director.

(2) Unlawful recreational fishing in the first degree is a gross misdemeanor." RCW 77.15.370, emphasis added.

The Statute goes on to define "state waters:"

"As used in this title or rules adopted under this title, unless the context clearly requires otherwise:

(35) "State waters" means all MARINE waters and fresh waters within ordinary high water lines and within the territorial boundaries of the state." RCWA 77.08.010, emphasis added.

From this it seems like snagging anywhere, fresh or salt is a gross misdemeanor. I would treat is as such, unless someone points out something else to me.

Tad,

I don't think there is an ambiguity/oversight in the regs. Perhaps it has to be rewritten in the future, but the way it stands now. I think things (from a LEGAL point of view) are clear:

Page 22 defines snagging. It says that hooked on the "mouth or on the head" is in "freshwater". See also page 20 for the definition of "head of the fish". The other portion of the page 22 definition of "snagging" states the "fish taking the hook voluntarily in its mouth" language.

Page 23 has the harvest rules (Statewide General Fishing). All it says is "You may not snag or attempt to snag fish". This clause applies to both fresh and saltwater, and therefore in saltwater, only the "voluntarily in its mouth" section of the definition appies, and not the "gill plate forward/head" section, which would kick into effect in freshwater.

Yes, I know... people will argue about how we can read the mind of the fish to determine if it took the hook voluntarily, whether flossing is legal, etc. But all these gray areas aside, the plain reading of the regs is that in saltwater, it has to be in the mouth or else you have to let it go (exception is forage fish, like smelt and herring).

So, being a lawyer myself, I think the department lawyer is incorrect when he says that it is OK to keep snagged fish in saltwater. Do not rely on his signed statement. Of course, other lawyers and judges are free to disagree with my interpretation of the law, and so use my comments at your own risk...

Thanks Brant and cheapskate. That's clear enough for me. Given your citations, I don't know how the Department lawyer could have concluded that the rules for marine waters don't specifically address which fish may and may not be legally kept. Sounds like fair notice to me. Thanks.

I'm with ET on this one. Unless you're fishing at the mouth of a small creek where the fish have stacked up (Hood Canal chums for example), its very difficult to intentionally snag a fish outside the mouth unless the fish attacked your lure/bait in the fish place.

To each his own.........

In the Salt when trolling if the fish is snagged it went after the bait, bonk it if it is a legal fish to keep and enjoy the meal.

I've done both, kept and released a snagged fish.

I think the intent of the law was for situations like Quilacene and Hoodsport, not jigging in 100' of water where the fish strikes at your lure and gets it in the nose or gill plate.

I interpret regs for a living, (not fishing regulations) and oftentimes the people who interpret them after they are on the books change the original intent of the mandate.

It also says in the regs that it illegal to intentionally snag fish in saltwater. It doesnt say it is illegal to keep snagged fish. For a game warden to be able to write a citation for this he has to witness you actively trying to snag fish I.E yanking repeatedly or using oversized hooks. I once brought in a silver that hit my jig but ended up coming in sideways, I bonked it and a game warden tryed to write me up but I argued and he did not write me up but he told me I better be careful and harrassed me for 3 years. I have never gotten a ticket and never will. the law is the law but some wardens try to push it.

Bonk anything if u can get away with it is my interpretation of the law...like one fish is gonna make a difference...and of course the arguement would be if everyone did it then it would make a difference...and the answer is not everyone has the nads....later....snag on