Driftless Trout Anglers

Welcome Guest! To enable all features please Login or Register.

Notification

Icon
Error

9 Pages<12345>»
Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Trouts  
#21 Posted : Tuesday, July 31, 2012 1:33:21 PM(UTC)
Trouts
Rank: Dragon Fly

Joined: 1/23/2011(UTC)
Posts: 240
Location: Minneapolis

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 2 time(s) in 2 post(s)
Anyone know if deep mud would legally count as an obstruction in WI you could leave the stream for? Im talking mud you sink up into past your knees.
“If the trout are lost, smash the state. More than any other fish, trout are dependent upon the ambience in which they are caught… At the first signs of deterioration, this otherwise vigorous fish just politely quits, as if to say, ‘If that’s how you want it…’”
Mark Dahlquist  
#22 Posted : Tuesday, July 31, 2012 1:59:21 PM(UTC)
Mark Dahlquist
Rank: Administration

Joined: 2/27/2010(UTC)
Posts: 4,894
Man
Location: Minnesota

Thanks: 8 times
Was thanked: 26 time(s) in 19 post(s)
Mud sinking up to your knees. I don't see it as deep water. It is a good question. What if one guy wears hip boots and another wears chest waders. The term deep is obviously relative.

http://dnr.wi.gov/fish/faq/access.htm
-Mark
Board Owner
UserPostedImage
Trouts  
#23 Posted : Tuesday, July 31, 2012 2:50:45 PM(UTC)
Trouts
Rank: Dragon Fly

Joined: 1/23/2011(UTC)
Posts: 240
Location: Minneapolis

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 2 time(s) in 2 post(s)
In the case I'm talking about I'm wading in water that is about a foot or two deep along the shore, but the mud seems like it is 2-3 feet deep. I would wad in the middle of the stream where the mud isn't such a problem, but the water is over my waders towards the middle of the stream where the bottom is soild. I have actually sunk in so deep I had to almost lay flat to get my legs out of the mud. I would certainly consider this deep mud as an obstruction, but I'm no lawyer. Just thought someone here might know.

Edited by user Tuesday, July 31, 2012 2:54:36 PM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

“If the trout are lost, smash the state. More than any other fish, trout are dependent upon the ambience in which they are caught… At the first signs of deterioration, this otherwise vigorous fish just politely quits, as if to say, ‘If that’s how you want it…’”
salvelinus fontinalis  
#24 Posted : Tuesday, July 31, 2012 7:33:24 PM(UTC)
salvelinus fontinalis
Rank: Dragon Fly

Joined: 4/1/2010(UTC)
Posts: 402

Trouts wrote:
In the case I'm talking about I'm wading in water that is about a foot or two deep along the shore, but the mud seems like it is 2-3 feet deep. I would wad in the middle of the stream where the mud isn't such a problem, but the water is over my waders towards the middle of the stream where the bottom is soild. I have actually sunk in so deep I had to almost lay flat to get my legs out of the mud. I would certainly consider this deep mud as an obstruction, but I'm no lawyer. Just thought someone here might know.



That would be considered an obstacle by Wisconsin's definition. If it proves to be too hazardous to stay in the stream, you're allowed to go on dry land to bypass the obstacle so long as you immediately return to the water.

I've seen it written more than once that lawmakers intentionally made the statute somewhat vague in order to give anglers and law enforcement some latitude as to their judgement as to what's considered an obstacle. What a 19 y/o kid can negotiate his way through in a stream very well could kill a 65 y/o.
Trouts  
#25 Posted : Tuesday, July 31, 2012 8:22:07 PM(UTC)
Trouts
Rank: Dragon Fly

Joined: 1/23/2011(UTC)
Posts: 240
Location: Minneapolis

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 2 time(s) in 2 post(s)
salvelinus fontinalis wrote:
Trouts wrote:
In the case I'm talking about I'm wading in water that is about a foot or two deep along the shore, but the mud seems like it is 2-3 feet deep. I would wad in the middle of the stream where the mud isn't such a problem, but the water is over my waders towards the middle of the stream where the bottom is soild. I have actually sunk in so deep I had to almost lay flat to get my legs out of the mud. I would certainly consider this deep mud as an obstruction, but I'm no lawyer. Just thought someone here might know.



That would be considered an obstacle by Wisconsin's definition. If it proves to be too hazardous to stay in the stream, you're allowed to go on dry land to bypass the obstacle so long as you immediately return to the water.

I've seen it written more than once that lawmakers intentionally made the statute somewhat vague in order to give anglers and law enforcement some latitude as to their judgement as to what's considered an obstacle. What a 19 y/o kid can negotiate his way through in a stream very well could kill a 65 y/o.



Thanks, I figured it would be considered an obstruction, but thought I would ask here as well.
“If the trout are lost, smash the state. More than any other fish, trout are dependent upon the ambience in which they are caught… At the first signs of deterioration, this otherwise vigorous fish just politely quits, as if to say, ‘If that’s how you want it…’”
big_river_bum  
#26 Posted : Thursday, March 14, 2013 2:16:03 PM(UTC)
big_river_bum
Rank: Dragon Fly

Joined: 6/18/2012(UTC)
Posts: 636
Location: Genoa

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 29 time(s) in 24 post(s)
what are the rules if the water you're fishing is too deep to wade, or too deep to safely wade? like the extreme lower ends of streams. would it make a difference if they're designated trout water/smallmouth water or not? would you then be allowed to walk the shoreline?

just wondering because i've been scouting a lot of streams like this. not only is wading looking like it could be hard, but most of these class III or undesignated sections of streams have very few access points and little to NO easment or dnr lands available
kfish  
#27 Posted : Thursday, March 14, 2013 4:39:56 PM(UTC)
kfish
Rank: Dragon Fly

Joined: 1/31/2012(UTC)
Posts: 177
Man
Location: central mn

Minnesota you can not leave the stream for any reason.Too deep,barbed wire,downed trees doesnt matter,feet wet.Wisconsin you can go around obstacle by most direct route back into stream.
dcarcher  
#28 Posted : Saturday, March 16, 2013 5:31:23 PM(UTC)
dcarcher
Rank: Caddis Fly

Joined: 3/11/2013(UTC)
Posts: 41
Location: dcarcher

As a landowner in the driftless area, this is the type of comment that makes me cringe when it comes to allowing access. So many frivolous lawsuits and everyone looking for an easy payout. I'm wondering if someone is going to break an ankle crossing a deadfall and sue for emotional suffering because it wouldn't have happened if I hadn't given access to fish on that day.

Mark Dahlquist wrote:
Top landowner complaints:

BTW if I get hurt on land in MN or WI, can the landowner be held accountable?

LenH  
#29 Posted : Sunday, March 17, 2013 8:59:40 AM(UTC)
Guest
Rank: Guest

Joined: 2/27/2010(UTC)
Posts: 4,883

i have trout fished in the driftless for 50 years and I have never heard of an angler sue anyone over getting hurt while fishing. I have hurt knees/back/ankle...It goes with the territory. Please if anyone has an example of the a legitimate law suit from a fall while fishing post the link here.
inland sweep  
#30 Posted : Sunday, March 17, 2013 10:50:52 AM(UTC)
inland sweep
Rank: Dragon Fly

Joined: 5/14/2010(UTC)
Posts: 550
Location: Arena, WI

Aren't landowners protected by the "berry picker" law?
Users browsing this topic
9 Pages<12345>»
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Powered by YAF.NET | YAF.NET © 2003-2019, Yet Another Forum.NET
This page was generated in 0.648 seconds.