CFWS Lt. says checkpoint is legal and useful

Photos by Charles James

Photos by Charles James

When deer season opened here on Saturday, the Department of Fish and Wildlife sent about a dozen additional wardens from places like Stockton and San Bernardino to the Eastern Sierra. On their way home Monday, the wardens staged a checkpoint south of Bishop to detect anyone who might have violated hunting or fishing laws.

The Lieutenant on scene, William Dailey, who is local, called the operation “the biggest bang for the buck”. Citizens who contacted Sierra Wave called it a waste of tax dollars and an invasion of privacy. Lieutenant Dailey said the wardens stopped and screened every southbound vehicle except semi-trucks – more than 2,000 of them. He said wardens asked the driver if they had been hunting or fishing. If they said yes, they were asked to go up to an area off the dfgcheckpointsignhighway where Lt. Dailey said wardens asked for consent to search the vehicle.

Wardens were looking for illegal game and over limits of fish. They also checked to make sure guns were not loaded. Dailey said this kind of operation “deters poaching.” He said, “One of these checkpoints does more good than 1,000 patrols. Word will travel.” Dailey said the Eastern Sierra does have problems with poaching and over limits.

To questions about the legality of searching vehicles without warrants, Lt. Dailey said there is case law and federal and state codes which allow such searches. Said Dailey, “We’re not looking for drugs or other things. We ask for consent to search and look for illegal game, over limits, and loaded guns.”

In an earlier press release, Fish and Wildlife said the checkpoint was conducted to “protect and conserve fish and wildlife, to encourage safety and sportsmanship by promoting voluntary compliance with laws, rules and regulations through education.” The release also said all anglers and hunters would be required to stop and submit to an inspection.

, , , ,

67 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Mark
Mark
9 years ago

Saw lots of Deer hunters this weekend but not a single DFW officer

I’m sure we scared all the Deer away with our loud dirtbikes.

Annoymous
Annoymous
9 years ago

First Ca Fish and wildlife officers are fully appointed peace officers under PC 832.2…. Meaning they enforce all state laws… Including drugs and traffic issues.. But they specialize in fish and game law… Wich cover pollution, pet trade, hunting, fishing, trapping, and commercial fishing. They have the legal authority to… Read more »

Wayne Deja
Wayne Deja
9 years ago

Bishop Local..EXACTLY !!!…. I don’t mind them spending tax dollars to deter those that come up here breaking the law and poaching wildlife and going over the legal limit while fishing…

Mark
Mark
9 years ago
Reply to  Wayne Deja

while fishing for an invasive species that is the foundation of the entire areas economy.. boy did the Eastern Sierra go down the path of a completely subsidized economy.

all the bs has completely turned me off of fishing. I’d rather go ride my dirtbike.

Bishop Local
Bishop Local
9 years ago

Our tax dollars at work!

Mark
Mark
9 years ago

Checkpoints may be common practice by various agencies. However these checkpoints to not remove our constitutional rights. DFW can ask what ever they want at their checkpoints. We do not have to answer any of their questions. If I was asked if I was fishing or hunting I would probably… Read more »

Trouble
Trouble
9 years ago

I think our founding fathers would go nuts if they knew people were being stopped and questioned without probable cause.

group think and rights
group think and rights
9 years ago
Reply to  Trouble

I think those same founding fathers would go nuts if they knew people of the same sex who express love for each other were having their rights stripped from them by some groups in our society, and the same goes for the demonization of a woman’s reproductive rights by that… Read more »

Trouble
Trouble
9 years ago

I think our founding fathers would have stood up our rights.

Pedro
Pedro
9 years ago
Reply to  Trouble

Remember our founding fathers established rights for free white male landowners. They and us have had to improve it over time.

Clean up your own act first
Clean up your own act first
9 years ago

There are (sadly) some amongst us who have a difficult time minding their own business.

Different Strokes
Different Strokes
9 years ago

“What some people do might seem peculiar to us, but it does not seem peculiar to them.”

– Atticus Finch, from “To Kill A Mockingbird”

Hans
Hans
9 years ago

Fish and Game checkpoints are common (and have been for decades) in many or most states during hunting season to make sure people aren’t poaching or bagging game they don’t have permits for. If you think it’s an evil plot you better avoid rural areas in most western and mid-western… Read more »

Wayne Deja
Wayne Deja
9 years ago
Reply to  Hans

Hans….so true….If people think the one check-point outside of Bishop is bad,try going to Oregon on their opening day week-end of deer and elk season…see what it’s like….but it does have to be done showing respect to the drivers and the hunters and fishermen,and not looking and acting as some… Read more »

Pedro
Pedro
9 years ago
Reply to  Wayne Deja

Wayne, Do you know of the action of Sheriff of El Dorado County suspending USFS LEO as deputies of state law in his county? Much as been made of it in the media lately as speaking to gun rights only. I read about it when it just happened and don’t… Read more »

Reality Check
Reality Check
9 years ago
Reply to  Pedro

I believe that both the Inyo and Mono County Sheriffs took away the authorization of USFS LEOs to enforce state laws over a decade ago. Perhaps Benett could check up on that. The last I knew is that Game Wardens are not real peace officers and can only enforce Fish… Read more »

wiseguy
wiseguy
9 years ago
Reply to  Reality Check

Reality Check,

Hey next time you post something do some research on the subject. FnG are state law enforcement meaning, They can and do enforce all laws in this state. And USFS LEO’s do have powers to enforce in Inyo and Mono Co.

Wayne Deja
Wayne Deja
9 years ago
Reply to  Reality Check

To “wiseguy’s” post below…..I think most fish and game officers know their boundries and don’t try to come across as these big LEO unless it has something to do with fish and game…..let’s hope so anyway….If I were speeding at night on HWY 395,which I rarely do,and happened to get… Read more »

Reality Check
Reality Check
9 years ago
Reply to  Reality Check

(e) Employees of the Department of Fish and Game designated by the
director, provided that the primary duty of those peace officers
shall be the enforcement of the law as set forth in Section 856 of
the Fish and Game Code.

Mark
Mark
9 years ago

“they were asked to go up to an area off the highway where Lt. Dailey said wardens asked for consent to search the vehicle.”

and what if consent wasn’t given? Technically you should never give consent.

salblaster
salblaster
9 years ago

maybe it will be on fish and games reality tv show. book em dano, that’s 1 fish to many, that’s fish homicide in the 1st degree.

Mark
Mark
9 years ago

I would also refuse to accept any educational handouts just on principal that the check point is bs.

which also makes me wonder if they’re printed in Spanish.

Legal Eagle – you’ve made some great points. Thanks for sharing.

Legal Eagle
Legal Eagle
9 years ago
Reply to  Mark

Great idea Mark on refusing to accept their handouts! It is a very good way to protest their checkpoint program.

They set up these checkpoints because they are too lazy or incompetent to go out in the field and catch the ones who are actually breaking Fish and Game laws.

Legal Eagle
Legal Eagle
9 years ago
Reply to  Legal Eagle

Here is an example of someone who knows his constitutional rights when confronted by the police. This would not fly in California where the law is different.

http://www.thedailysheeple.com/law-student-to-cop-in-order-to-stop-me-you-have-to-suspect-me-of-a-crime_092013

sugar magnolia
sugar magnolia
9 years ago
Reply to  Legal Eagle

if you pulled that here, you might get away with it at first blush…but then the harassment would start…ie. you’re gonna get pulled over right and left…I’ve seen it happen. They can find almost any reason to pull you over, your headlight/taillight looked dim (doesn’t have to be true, they’ll… Read more »

Roy
Roy
9 years ago

I have fished the Sierras since 1958 and since retirement in 1996 I fish over 100 days a year in the Sierras…I must admit I have never ever seen a Fish and Game checkpoint in my life. It will be interesting to see what the results are.

bassackwards
bassackwards
9 years ago

In the past few months the Eastern Sierras have definitely become a Police State, as legal as it may be. Regardless of the legality, it just doesn’t sit right with me as a local resident. I use to tell my friends and family in Southern California to come up and… Read more »

Tim
Tim
9 years ago

Sierra Wave does a good job covering stories such as this one. Bennett, will you file a records request and find out how much money including overtime was spent? This seems very over zealous for such a small reward. This area is surely getting a reputation for stop and search.… Read more »

Tom O.
Tom O.
9 years ago

If you are stopped,Refuse to answer questions if you are not a hunter, They will let you go. Oh ya, dont forget to film it!!! Complete waste of $$$ and an invasion of privacy.

bobbyjoe
bobbyjoe
9 years ago
Reply to  Tom O.

Didn’t work in my case, tried to film with my Samsung phone and was told to stop.

Mark1971
Mark1971
9 years ago
Reply to  bobbyjoe

That’s just wrong. They can’t tell you to stop filming. There’s nothing illegal about it at all. I would contact somebody at Dept. of Fish and Wildlife and tell them about what happened and ask them if this agent was following official policy.

Mark
Mark
9 years ago
Reply to  Mark1971

They can ask you to stop taking video but the request carries no weight.

Upon being requested to stop the video you politely tell them the video is for there protection as well as yours, and well within your rights.

Mark
Mark
9 years ago
Reply to  bobbyjoe

You should have maned up and said “no I will not stop filming”.

Exercise your rights or lose them!

Legal Eagle
Legal Eagle
9 years ago
Reply to  Mark

Right on Mark! You have the right to film in a public place. There is no expectation of privacy at a public location.

Know your rights and use them or lose them.

Pedro
Pedro
9 years ago
Reply to  Legal Eagle

I have done that when I was alone in the car and knew I could risk a few days in jail to sort it out without losing my job etc. I have also bit my tongue when I had family in the car and I didn’t want them to suffer.… Read more »

Pedro
Pedro
9 years ago

Did they search any vehicles without consent? Why were semis exempt?

Benett Kessler
Benett Kessler
9 years ago
Reply to  Pedro

I don’t know if they searched any vehicles without consent. Semis were exempt because of something like – their size and difficulties
getting a lot of big vehicles in one area.
BK

sean
sean
9 years ago

I fully support checkouts related to public safety like looking for drunk or unlicensed drivers. But Looking for FISH?

Come on – this is weak sauce.

You can give the CDFW some of your thoughts here: https://www.facebook.com/CaliforniaDFW

or here if you want to be more formal about it:

http://www.dfg.ca.gov/about/docs/FG-980CitizensReport.pdf

Tourbillon
Tourbillon
9 years ago
Reply to  sean

See ya Seanny as you slide down that slippery slope into oblivion. Accept checkpoints for something you call “good” and you’re gonna have to accept them for what others call “good”.

Pedro
Pedro
9 years ago
Reply to  sean

Same sean, who said this about saturation patrol in Bridgeport bustin Burners? sean September 7, 2013 at 5:28 pm # “There is a difference between “profiling” and “racial profiling”. There is nothing wrong with “profiling”. Thats what cops do to catch crooks. “Profiling” on things other than race is not… Read more »

Sean
Sean
9 years ago
Reply to  Pedro

You don’t need to quote me. I know what I wrote. The difference is looking for drugs or drunks vs. Dead fish. How many dead fish got drunk and crashed head on into a mini van killing a family coming home from church? This checkpoint is a waste of resources.… Read more »

sugar magnolia
sugar magnolia
9 years ago
Reply to  Sean

no difference brother. In fact, I’m pretty sure the F&G one is legal, due to hunting license laws, while the burners were wrongly profiled. Again, I’m sure this point isn’t above your intelligence level, they were not pulling over drivers suspected of being under the influence. No-one has a problem… Read more »

Pedro
Pedro
9 years ago
Reply to  Sean

Sean, you support checkpoints to enforce laws that you think are important, and tell a person that writes SW to complain they feel treated unfairly and rudely to just suck it up and you don’t need them around. Then you get upset about a checkpoint that you don’t like,downplay it… Read more »

Eastern Sierra Local
Eastern Sierra Local
9 years ago
Reply to  sean

You can’t support DUI check points while simultaneously not support Fish and Game checkpoints….that’s contradictory.

sean
sean
9 years ago

Dear Pedro and ESL -I am flattered you took the time to address me directly. I’m excited you are tracking all my blog posts. I actually can support whatever I want in any manner I want. My position is checkpoints related to public safety are OK and not a big… Read more »

Pedro
Pedro
9 years ago
Reply to  sean

Sean, not tracking, just recalling previous conversation along this topic. We are a lot alike. Start with sarcastic one liners followed by over the top rhetoric and then maybe a clear argument for our opinion when pressed. We can probably spare others the pain of having to reread our posts.… Read more »

Tom O.
Tom O.
9 years ago

I never realized thathunters and fisherman and non hunters and non fisherman were as dangerous as drunk drivers. Wow.

Pedro
Pedro
9 years ago
Reply to  Tom O.

Only when they’re driving or poaching drunk.

MK
MK
9 years ago

So what happens if one refuses the search. Where is the probable cause?

Legal Eagle
Legal Eagle
9 years ago
Reply to  MK

They must have reasonable suspicion to detain you. If they ask you if you have been hunting or fishing, you can decline to answer, then ask if you are free to go. You are exercising your 5th amendment rights. If they ask to search your vehicle this means that they… Read more »

Fish and game code
Fish and game code
9 years ago
Reply to  MK

As per Section 2012 in the California Fish and Game Code, hunters and fisherman are required by law to exhibit any and all game in possession and/or equipment used for or that can be used for fishing/hunting when demanded by a game warden. The way I read the law if… Read more »

Legal Eagle
Legal Eagle
9 years ago

Use your 5th amendment rights and decline to answer.

Mark
Mark
9 years ago

“its unlawful to refuse after admitting you were fishing or hunting.”

so when you’re asked if you’ve been fishing or hunting and you reply; I’m sorry I don’t answer questions.

What happens next?

It really is becoming a police state

bobbyjoe
bobbyjoe
9 years ago
Reply to  MK

The probable cause in my case was a large empty ice chest in the back of our vehicle. We were on our way to Ridgecrest to visit family, pick up groceries and supplies. No guns, no fishing poles, no fish and no game. Scared my daughter and that was not… Read more »

Pedro
Pedro
9 years ago
Reply to  bobbyjoe

bbj, So, you told them you had not been hunting or fishing? Did you give consent to search? They make sure to point out they asked these questions, but not that they acted regardless of answers.

Legal Eagle
Legal Eagle
9 years ago
Reply to  bobbyjoe

Having an ice chest in the back of your truck would not give them probable cause to search your ice chest or your vehicle since the vast majority of the time, an ice chest is used for a purpose other than storing game. If you gave them consent to search,… Read more »

Legal Eagle
Legal Eagle
9 years ago

Just say no!

Charles O. Jones
Charles O. Jones
9 years ago

This is hardly the assault on our Constitution that some would like us to believe.

I hope they get the “bang for the buck” they were looking for. Because “bang for the buck” is seriously lacking in too many government programs.

Tourbillon
Tourbillon
9 years ago

Yes, “bang for the buck”. Well, hassle enough innocent citizens on flimsy pretexts, and eventually you’ll get a small insignificant pop, if not a bang, for the money and the disgusting infringement on liberty.

Any little bitty pop satisfies some, no matter what the cost. Right Chuck?

Richard
Richard
9 years ago

How much did this cost?
Did they catch any criminals?

Benett Kessler
Benett Kessler
9 years ago
Reply to  Richard

Fish and Wildlife is supposed to legally issue a press release on the results.
We’ll be pushing for it.
BK

jdd
jdd
9 years ago
Reply to  Benett Kessler

Why should you have to ‘push’ for it. If fish and game is ‘legally’ required to issue a press release, they wouldn’t do something illegal and not issue it, would they??

Benett Kessler
Benett Kessler
9 years ago
Reply to  jdd

We don’t think so, but Fish and Game does not have a good record at getting back to us.
BK

Mark1971
Mark1971
9 years ago

So why are they asking to search the vehicle if the press release says submission to the search is required and Lt. Dailey says state and federal codes allow it? If the driver says no, what happens?

Legal Eagle
Legal Eagle
9 years ago
Reply to  Mark1971

You have the right to say no and continue on your way. They are on a “fishing expedition”.

dean
dean
9 years ago
Reply to  Mark1971

More likely is you say “No” and then they suddenly notice something “new” and develop a “reasonable” suspicion to justify a search wherein they tear your vehicle apart, find nothing, and send you on your way 45 minutes later.

Mark
Mark
9 years ago
Reply to  dean

Or while searching they just happen to find a bag of cocaine which they just planted.

“Eastern Sierra; the land of checkpoints”