Snagging Question

[Ruler]

I was reading the thread in coldwater about snagging fish while trolling and have a question.

In that thread, there are several references to COs checking the fish for 'snag marks', meaning where a hook was sunk into the fish. Well, what happens if you catch a fish legally hooked in the mouth that has bloody marks on it from where it was previously snagged? It's happened to me a couple of times and I haven't even caught that many salmon. One fish in particular that my dad got last year was in real rough shape - a rip in her side where somebody had snagged it, a 'lead plug' still stuck in her tail, and a small treble with a chunk of skein embedded in her throat with 3' of line hanging out of her mouth. All that and she still hit the barramundi mauler my dad was throwing and put up a descent fight. However, if the criteria for issuing a ticket for snagging is the presence of wounds that indicate that the fish may have been foul-hooked recently, we would've been sunk if checked. Heck, there was one day in particular on a river that my fishing buddy snagged a king and it broke him off. (Naturally - he was flinging flies. ;) :lol: ) We kept fishing and about 15 minutes later, I hooked the same exact fish on a plug; we knew because when I got it in, his fly was still stuck in the side of it's head just behind the eye. Both of us were kinda freaked out by that.

Also, what if you hook a fish with one hook of a plug and one of the other hooks (on many of my larger plugs, sometimes 4-5" away) embeds itself in the fish's head or gill plate during the fight? It was hooked in the mouth, but would also have a fresh wound that could be interpreted as being snagged if inspected afterwards by the bloody mark on it's head. This has happened with a significant percentage of fish I've taken.

[boehr]

Marks in the body of the fish does not mean anything. Nobody is going to get a ticket for marks. If they get a ticket it will be because they were seen fouling hooking or snagging a fish and keeping the fish. The law is clear, fish taken MUST be hooked in the mouth.

Sec. 48703. (1) A person shall not take, catch, or kill or attempt to take, catch, or kill a fish in the waters of this state...or by any other means or device other than a single line or a single rod and line while held in the hand or under immediate control, and with a hook or hooks attached, baited with a natural or artificial bait while being used for still fishing, ice fishing, casting, or trolling for fish, which is a means of the fish taking the bait or hook in the mouth....

[Beave]

Clarification please Boehr....

Is there any court ruling on what happens if a hook goes through the outside of the mouth in? Part of the hook is then in the mouth. I'm not trying to play symantics, but I could see that being "in the mouth". It's not uncommon in a weekend of big lake fishing to have a fish caught this way. I suspect they're coming in from the side in these cases and grab at the head of the spoon and end up hooking themselves from the outside in.

[boehr]

I'm not trying to play symantics Yes you are. :lol:

There are not any court rulings because I don't know of any case where a fish was hooked in the mouth and another part of the same lure was hooked on the gill on the line was wrapped around the tail or anything else where a person received a ticket when one of the hooks of the lure was in the mouth.