Tidal Fish Forum banner

More Harassment from Watermen

52K views 134 replies 56 participants last post by  buckshotgumbo 
#1 · (Edited)
It's a real shame that the one or two bad apples keep coming out from the Maryland Watermen population with harassing things. This morning I received a text from a number that I did not recognize that said, " I see you guys got hammered in your hearing on Senate bill 1032. Oh well!!!" . I responded that I was not sure who this was but that the bill got a favorable vote by all committee members.

My gut told me this sounded like a harassing text so I looked up the number and the number came back belonging to a Robert Hodge Newberry of Crumpton, MD. Upon a simple search it came back that he is a commercial watermen and has a long list of Natural Resources Violations ranging from:
1) possession of unculled oysters/undersized oysters (he was guilty)
2) to possession of striped bass over 36 inches (guilty)
3) to fishing with out TFL license in possession (could not tell what verdict was)
4) participating in fishery with out a license (guilty, got pbj)
5) striped bass with out allocation (pleaded not guilty, got guilty verdict)
6) possession of undersized striped bass (pleaded not guilty, got guilty verdict)
7) yet another possession of undersized striped bass (pleaded not guilty, got guilty verdict)

He has other charges as well but I think you get the point. When I told him that I was going to report his text to the police as harassment he went on to tell me he was only texting me to to give me the current information on the bill....really?! Then he got religious and said he was sorry he bothered me, "god bless and tight lines".

I know some honest watermen who are good people, but I have to say with the recent antics by the "one or two bad" apples I am beginning to feel like there is another side to all this. Maybe the good watermen are in the minority and the bad ones really the majority? They try to bully and harasses you and then when you call them on it they give the "I did not mean anything, God Bless" line. I think the public is beginning to see through the BS. I feel bad for the good ones because it's the "one or two, three, four, five, ten, twenty" that are really painting a bad picture of their group.

Brandon
 
See less See more
#6 · (Edited)
He may be harassing however, if i read this amendment to the bill correctly, he's right. The entire thing has been gutted to just create a one year advisory committee tasked with reviewing gill net regulations.

http://mlis.state.md.us/2012rs/amds/bil_0002/sb1032_16413701.pdf

Original bill http://mlis.state.md.us/2012rs/bills/sb/sb1032f.pdf
 
#9 · (Edited)
Each citizen has a right to PEACE

Generally it is wrong [and illegal criminal in Maryland] to alarm , or repeatedly annoy, another person without a lawful reason. Malicious intent is a factor. The intentional creation of fear, or alarm is forbidden in maryland under Criminal law title 3 -800 which is crimes against persons: specifically stalking or harrassment. Section 804 [misuse of telephone] applies to this situation:
.
CRIMINAL LAW
TITLE 3. OTHER CRIMES AGAINST THE PERSON
SUBTITLE 8. STALKING AND HARASSMENT
.
Md. CRIMINAL LAW Code Ann. § 3-804 (2012)
.
§ 3-804. Misuse of telephone facilities and equipment
.
(a) Prohibited. -- A person may not use telephone facilities or equipment to make:
.
(1) an anonymous call that is reasonably expected to annoy, abuse, torment, harass, or embarrass another;
.
(2) repeated calls with the intent to annoy, abuse, torment, harass, or embarrass another; or
.
(3) a comment, request, suggestion, or proposal that is obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, or indecent.
.
(b) Penalty. -- A person who violates this section is guilty of a misdemeanor and on conviction is subject to imprisonment not exceeding 3 years or a fine not exceeding $ 500 or both.
.
The caller violated # 1 above, what do you think? If he calls again, it would be a violation of #2.
.
Important note, you must save the text, print it out, transcribe it, and send it to the criminal commissioner at Easton.
You [ each citizen] must provide believable evidence [ that the forbidden act did happen, and who did it.
Save the documentation, in duplicate, and mail one to the D.T. comissioner.
.
With respect, and sorrow for this personal attack.
.=================
If a Md. citizen has reason [ sensible logical objective reason] to be afraid of another person, It is not hard to get a 6 month protective order.
.
For example if an " ex" were to come and damage your car, you would have objective reason to fear that she might damage you next time. Most Judges are quick to order the " crazy " to stay away from you, for six months.
 
#83 ·
Generally it is wrong [and illegal criminal in Maryland] to alarm , or repeatedly annoy, another person without a lawful reason. Malicious intent is a factor. The intentional creation of fear, or alarm is forbidden in maryland under Criminal law title 3 -800 which is crimes against persons: specifically stalking or harrassment. Section 804 [misuse of telephone] applies to this situation:
.
CRIMINAL LAW
TITLE 3. OTHER CRIMES AGAINST THE PERSON
SUBTITLE 8. STALKING AND HARASSMENT
.
Md. CRIMINAL LAW Code Ann. § 3-804 (2012)
.
§ 3-804. Misuse of telephone facilities and equipment
.
(a) Prohibited. -- A person may not use telephone facilities or equipment to make:
.
(1) an anonymous call that is reasonably expected to annoy, abuse, torment, harass, or embarrass another;
.
(2) repeated calls with the intent to annoy, abuse, torment, harass, or embarrass another; or
.
(3) a comment, request, suggestion, or proposal that is obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, or indecent.
.
(b) Penalty. -- A person who violates this section is guilty of a misdemeanor and on conviction is subject to imprisonment not exceeding 3 years or a fine not exceeding $ 500 or both.
.
The caller violated # 1 above, what do you think? If he calls again, it would be a violation of #2.
.
Important note, you must save the text, print it out, transcribe it, and send it to the criminal commissioner at Easton.
You [ each citizen] must provide believable evidence [ that the forbidden act did happen, and who did it.
Save the documentation, in duplicate, and mail one to the D.T. comissioner.
.
With respect, and sorrow for this personal attack.
.=================
If a Md. citizen has reason [ sensible logical objective reason] to be afraid of another person, It is not hard to get a 6 month protective order.
.
For example if an " ex" were to come and damage your car, you would have objective reason to fear that she might damage you next time. Most Judges are quick to order the " crazy " to stay away from you, for six months.
I sometimes can't figure out some of the legal definitions, i mean what's the difference between obscene, lewd, filthy or indecent, or the difference between annoy, harass, torment? It just seems a bit redundant.
 
#11 ·
There is no end to BS on the net problem, there are a lot more bad apples then most people think. Its been going on before most people on this site were born. The disease that the bad apples have has infected the DNR & Representatives that make the rules. It took a long time to get this way & will take a good while to fix but I think the process has started. Thank God our old friend at the Sun paper made it public. But I believe the upper pressure made her change job description.
 
#12 ·
Ha! You zapped him good, Chief! This guy is probably one of the "your stealing my heritage" whiners; translation: "your stealing my right to take whatever I want because that's all I've ever known."

Unfortunately it's a pervasive attitute reflected in all natural resources conservation arguments. At least we are talking about a renewable resource that can benefit from draconian managment, ie. moratorium. What about the 300 million years worth of oil that we are on pace to burn up in 300 years? We're halfway there and will hit a tipping point sooner than we want to think about.
 
#16 ·
....... and you are just seeing this Brandon ....... really !! ..........

it's a shame when the lawlessness is part of the culture and there are just 1 or 2 good apples left ....... poaching is a way of life ........ remember the Federal case ......... went from the watermen to that packers to the restaurants and the watermen cried over the long investigation and theses guys were just trying to feed their familiies etc .......... any watermen turn in the guys who left the nets out illegally ........ bet there are more than a few who know who they are ........
 
#17 ·
I once had a waterman tell me "If it werent for us watermen, the bay would be dead. We sustain a sensible harvest to keep the bay healthy".
I'm just glad 200 years ago the watermen got here just in time to save us, mother nature has been f*cking up the bay for 10,000 years prior. Thank you watermen!!!!
 
#18 ·
No doubt someone will be down my shirt, for saying this: Friends, I do not hate watermen in general. They have every right to harvest legally . The numerous oyster thieves, and fish thieves, were perhaps at one time watermen, but they have earned a new title: "Poacher".
.
Buckshot, and Beretta, and others made a good point, last week! All watermen should not be insulted, because some [ I hope few ] are professional poachers. We should go after the known poachers, and try to get them off the water. How can we do that?? I do not know not yet anyway...
.
* Can we influence the DNR to remove the poacher's license to harvest???
* Can the Judges help by increasing the penalties on GUILTY VIOLATORS?
* Can we ask legislators to make the Points system work on Guilties, and, and, and PBJ's.
* Can the boats used for poaching be forfeit to the State? Guns used to poach deer are routinely siezed. Why not boats??
.
There are probably better ideas, but They must be suggested; Proposed.
.
I have been trying to help by using my time and knowledge, to help and advise. Brandon should not be afraid to go out alone in his boat. So I did research and presented the law on protective orders and Harrassment.
.
I am trying to at least understand how the legal part of this poaching system is working. I cannot go to every trial. I cannot travel long distances, even for an important case, like the one in Dorchester next month. The Bay needs help here.
.
The Bay had a win this month. Someone suggested that the court clerks would give copies of past dockets. That could be huge, because we would know the names and case numbers of recent violators. Then we can do research. Granger wrote to Somerset, and asked nicely for the past docket for 13 march. The clerks promptly mailed the docket to me. Amazing!
.
Talbot county responded to a similar letter. That is two out of two. Excellent!! Best regards, and thanks for reading. Tom G.
.
Note: We need help to write letters and do research, even a few hours would help the bay. We need more guys like "marqcaptma".
 
#19 ·
Tom , few years ago - DNR worked out a point system for violations. Idea was similar to driver license points - get too many in short time , you lose the right to be on the water.

There are various levels / points given out. The weak link is judges who hand down reduced sentences or PBJ.

The DNR can seize a boat - however , it must be kept in good condition. If the suspected poacher is found not guilty and his boat was damaged while stored by DNR - DNR would have to fix it. Picture a boat seized in winter and engine freezes or worse - sinks.

Slowly - ever so slowly , people are beginning to see poachers for what they really are - common petty thieves.
 
#20 ·
Brandon, seems to me that your name is being spread around because of what you stand for on the gill net issue and TF. Glad you used the knowledge you have to find out who left the message and confront him. If the DNR ever decides to do the right thing and stop being influenced by the waterman, the bays resources will improve more then before. I for one thank you and the others for taking the time to make the efforts to improve the Chesapeake Bays future.
 
#22 ·
just to play devils advocate for a minute, the ches bay rec anglers are the most possessive, holier than thou people I have ever run across on my worldy travels, not choosing sides here, but every intelligent discussion has to be represented from both sides. The rec anglers of the bay believe they own the resource just as much as the comms...If I was a comm on the ches bay I would hate you all too, thank god I found greener pastures and don't deal with either side anymore...but I can see both sides equally.

99% of TF is weekend warriors that go out twice a month, on sat morning, get skunked because they don't know how to fish and then hop online and blame the comms...if you are not limiting out on rockfish every trip out or close to it, you simply have not done enough of your OWN homework and dues on the water, there are more fish in that bay then could ever be poached by the "bad"comms...

if your not catching fish and blaming the comms your lazy...
 
#25 ·
Capt Nemo, A couple of valid points in there ! However I respectfully disagree on your statement, "......., there are more fish in that bay then could ever be poached by the "bad"comms.... " I do not hold that belief, simply because commercial fishing techniques are highly efficient tools in the hands of experienced watermen and what keeps them from wiping out striped bass,for example, is that most of them conduct themselves within the law or nearly so. Once a violator crosses the line, and starts to fish totally illegal, without regard to getting caught, what is to keep him from catching all that he can...only the problem of finding a buyer and the logistics of selling them, ie. sheer bulk of the fish, transportation, etc.

It is the prospect that a gill netter gone amuck, has so much more potential to do massive damage to local fish stocks. I compare it to the man who throws firecrackers on the sidewalk on the fourth of July ; it's illegal and should not be condoned. However if he decided that the device used for his amusement was sticks of dynamite, the potential for a bad outcome is considerably greater. Therefore we are all in agreement that there needs to be regulations, that they need to be enforced, and there needs to be the perception that justice is being evenhandedly administered.

Back to the topic of this thread; Brandon perceives undue harassment. It's his sandbox here, his rules, and his privilege to post as he wishes. The underlying question...the elephant in the room...is what to do about that and is Brandon asking us directly or indirectly, to do what ? Advise him ? Certainly if there was an email address or a return phone number,for the alleged harasser, posting it with a request to transmitt one's message to Mr Bad Person could be a ploy. Beyond that, simply identifying Mr Bad Person by name and other directory info. is a choice and informs us to be on the lookout regarding future dealings.

Going beyond that however, starts creating legal problems.
 
#24 ·
Thanks Capt Nemo, for your ideas, you make some worthwile points, from that submarine of yours...
.
I am the posterchild for a guy who has not had good success fishing lately. I have fished this Bay since "Diamond Jim" was chased around.
However It seems that my fishing skill can be separated from the poaching issue.
.
Brandon is a better fisherman, but even if he fished with a rusty Shakespeare Reel, He should not be Harrassed. He did his civic duty.
I thanked him for speaking up for the fish, and going to that meeting. Why do you not thank him?
.
There were numerous defendants in the District Court for Somerset County; Do you dispute that there were over 25 trials on Natural Resources [Somerset alone] Matters? There are numerous threads in " Protect the Fish " that detail where and when citizens faced a judge. The facts are mounting up and the large number of cases / citations are kind of speaking for themselves.
.
Fish cannot talk or defend themselves. Some of us are trying to do some good. Some of us really care about the Bay.
I for one, welcome your comments and your ideas. We all anticipate your reply, Respectfully sent Tom G.
 
#26 · (Edited)
Capt. Nemo are rec's to stand by and watch all the illegal activity and do nothing. I believe the poachers many commercial have and are creating there own destiny and so be it. I'm not as smart as many Capt.'s but it you believe that the stock can't be remove from the water, your not in reality.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top