Medred's Explanation

[Doug from Anchorage]

Medred says one of his bagged fish disappeared. Says he figured he could legally replace it. Honest mistake, or did he know better?

Part of me says: Yea. I can see that. I'd probably would have done the same thing.

While the other part of me says: This guy is the "in the know" outdoor expert. How would he not possibly know that what he did was illegal.

Make your call...........

 

[Cutter]

I dunno

I dunno

I was ready to flame the guy pretty bad, but then i read his article, and he seemed apologetic, didn't seem to make himself look better or like it really wasn't his fault, he took it on the chin like a man and i respect that. As far as i'm concerned, at least FWP have $130 more in thier pocket than before...and i can't think of a better guy to pay it.

No-one's without fault - everyones got a little junk in thier trunk with past fishing issues.

So in the end - its a big good job for FWP - and keep up the good work.

I forgive him, but that DOES NOT MEAN I AGREE WITH HIM!!!

later

 

[Doug from Anchorage]

Already been hashed out

Already been hashed out

My bad. I see this has already been hashed out on an earlier thread. I don't want to kick a dead horse. Sorry.

 

[Marcus]

Why do we do it?

Why do we do it?

"Then gently scan your brother man,
Still gentler sister woman;
Tho' they may go a kennin wrang,
To step aside is human;
One point must still be greatly dark,—
The moving why they do it;
And just as lamely can ye mark,
How far perhaps they rue it."

"Who made the heart, 'tis He alone
Decidedly can try us;
He knows each chord, its various tone,
Each spring, its various bias;
Then at the balance let's be mute,
We never can adjust it;
What's done we partly may compute,
But know not what's resisted."
— Robert Burns

 

[Paul H]

I was glad to read his article on the incident. He realized he screwed up and owned up to it. Beats the heck out of saying the fish cops were out to get him, blah, blah, blah.

In effect you can say it was a public service to remind all of the regs, and consequences for violating them.

 

[GWHunter]

Article Link?

Article Link?

Does anyone have the link to his article? I would love to read it.

 

[cmo1977]

here is the link for you.

http://www.adn.com/outdoors/craig_medred/story/7899653p-7793035c.html

 

[AKmud]

ADN

ADN

Should be on the ADN site -

www.adn.com

His articles are in the Outdoors section.

 

[Dirtofak]

I wonder...

I wonder...

If he only had 3 in his possession when stopped, they must have been watching him VERY closely with all those other fishermen out there.

 

[buzby]

suspect

suspect

I knew about this early last week and was wondering if he was gonna fess up, which he did. I read his article in the ADN and found it to be a little suspect. I read him every weekend and usually have no qualms with him, but I don't buy this little tale. He tells of how there has not been good enforcement on the river and now there is. Maybe you thought you could get away with something. Then he talks of accidentally snagging fish and how to rip the hooks out without actually landing the fish. He makes the assumption that they are mostly snagged in the fins. As he is heading to clean his 3 fish he noted to himself of a couple of other guys that seemed to have the master technique for catching reds, but they were over the limit. He thought he might go down and tell them about the regs, but didn't???? Now he is gonna try to use an airman as his alibi and scapegoat. (uses his name to back up the story, because most of us won't but it) Even though he gets the spirit of the law he decides that nodoby else is paying attention, why not and finally snags his final fish in the mouth. As he is headed to the cleaning table, one of the master fisherman flash him a badge. You know the guys he was gonna teach a lesson too but didn't. He gets busted!!!! It was worth it though because the confiscated fish were going to older people who could not fish for themselves and because he wanted to help the Dept of Public Safety make more money and be more cost effective. Now the OFF DUTY COP(where do I apply?)told him he allowed a double limit because he was using a proxy. He, like Craig doesn't agree with the whole proxy idea, but the OFF DUTY COP still took more than his share because he had a note saying it was ok. I am sure he took his spare 3 fish to the old folks home. Im gonna get that panhandler on Old Seward and Dimond to give me a note to catch his fish too even though I don't believe in the kind of thing.
This whole story is a steaming pile. I think you got ratted out by a fan and made up this whole story to make yourself look good somehow.
This is just my opinion. I could be wrong and will read the article again.
BUZ

 

[AKCheese]

Sad Part Is

Sad Part Is

In this great outdoors state the Outdoors Editor of the largest newspaper generally writes sardonic caustic or self gratifying articles.........

Half a page here dedicated to people daring to drive the speed limit and not pull over so he can speed past

Half a page there dedicated to people not as smart as he is for whatever it is they did to get themselves into trouble legally or safety wise

Half a page about how wearing helmets while skiing is actually dangerous stupid and selfish ( hopefully anybody with half a brain realizes that's moronic)

Half a page everywhere about how much effort he puts into keeping himself in shape running and skiing and blah blah blah

Now half a page dedicated to his mea culpa for violating fish and game laws....... (and if you actually read the article he leaves the door open that he actually may have not REALLY been wrong........just TECHNICALLY wrong)

then a few journalistic slight of hand gestures to soften "the story"........ (what does the proxy system have to do with him violating the law)?

a backhanded swipe at the F&G officer who wrote the ticket " he seemed a little unsure of the exact nature of the regulation applying to this situation."

did he realize that he in fact HAD killed 3 fish..........lost one due to carelessness on his part........then killed a 4th fish........thus breaking the law?

no.............as stated in the article he went back and scoured the regs and finally came to the conclusion the he might have been technically wrong....

bottom line he just doesn't "get it".........

I'm sure in future columns we'll hear this incident recounted or referred to countless times.........somehow adding to the legacy of our hero.........Craig Medred.........outdoorsman extrordinaire!!

when is the ADN going to jettison this guy and get somebody who can expound upon and educate readers on the positive things available in our great outdoors

I feel embarrassed every time I think about visitors coming up........ turning to the outdoors section each Sunday and reading this guys drivel.........this is the best the Great Land's largest newspaper has to offer in the way of outdoor writing / editing????

 

[slimm]

why?

why?

why would he hang the fish in a tree?
that seems to me he should know better than that' with all of his vast knowlage and experiance.
keeping your fish in the river is right up towards the top of the rules of the river.

 

[stevesch]

He caught/killed 3 fish, lost 1 from a stringer, and instead of stopping fishing after his limit, he resumed fishing, then caught/killed 1 more

3 + 1 = 4

Nothing newsworthy about this, other than it being a reporter. There are endless variations of it (I gave one away, I dunno what happened, It musthavebeenaliveandgotlooseandswamaway, I lost count, I caught a bigger one which I liked so I let the smaller one "go", blablabla), none of which are legal.