# Fwc is using drones in our area.



## flounderslayerman (Jun 3, 2011)

Got a call from my mom today to give me a heads up not to break any fishing regs. She told me a friend of hers which is the owner of Fisher-Brown Insurance got busted by a drone last week. He cleaned his snapper on the way in. When he got to the dock fwc was waiting for him with pics in hand of them cleaning the fish. Fwc told him they were taken from a drone. Fwc took them to jail instead of just writing them a ticket. So be carefull fwc is watching.


----------



## kahala boy (Oct 1, 2007)

They are watching......


----------



## Wugitus (Oct 16, 2008)

Only the federal could spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to catch a fish cleaner. But they can not balance a budget, protect the borders, and we still have terrorists.


----------



## kanaka (Oct 3, 2007)

Tin foil in your bimini top will help ward off this Obama intrusion upon our fishing rights/wrongs.....


----------



## Orion45 (Jun 26, 2008)

flounderslayerman said:


> Got a call from my mom today to give me a heads up not to break any fishing regs. She told me a friend of hers which is the owner of Fisher-Brown Insurance got busted by a drone last week. He cleaned his snapper on the way in. When he got to the dock fwc was waiting for him with pics in hand of them cleaning the fish. Fwc told him they were taken from a drone. Fwc took them to jail instead of just writing them a ticket. So be carefull fwc is watching.


How does the FWC know he wasn't cleaning the snapper to eat on board his boat? You're allowed 1.5 lbs per person for consumption aboard a vessel...provided cooking facilities are present, the fish is of legal size, and in season. 

However, if he got caught with filets when he landed...he's screwed.


----------



## sel1005 (Jan 10, 2008)

did anyone see this on the news? I have not yet, would be interesting to see what the FWC has to say about it


----------



## markw4321 (Oct 4, 2007)

Why is it always someone who knows someone who got a drone ticket. When I hear it from a trusted source who actually got a ticket first hand then I might believe it. My 2 cents.


----------



## Sea Rover (Jan 15, 2008)

Prove it. What is the guys name? There will be a booking log on the jails website.


----------



## JoeyWelch (Sep 25, 2009)

markw4321 said:


> Why is it always someone who knows someone who got a drone ticket. When I hear it from a trusted source who actually got a ticket first hand then I might believe it. My 2 cents.


Yep,...Kinda like Bigfoot.


----------



## Splittine (Nov 24, 2007)

How come it's always a friend of a friend or I know somebody. You'd think as many members that are on here that someone would have a first hand experience.


----------



## CatCrusher (Jan 18, 2009)

jlw1972 said:


> Yep,...Kinda like Bigfoot.


I don't what your talking about Joey, I've seen Bigfoot twice!! the drone thing ain't happening


----------



## Firefishvideo (Jul 1, 2010)

I'm gonna give that a tentative BS.
Not because I think they wouldn't LOVE to do it.....but because I don't think they are capable.
The entire FWC budget isn't big enough to just buy a few drones.....let alone pay for the support crew.
....now I wouldn't put it past ole Obama to divert a few drones away from the border ...and put a thumb on a few republican fisherman!


----------



## JoeyWelch (Sep 25, 2009)

sbarrow said:


> I don't what your talking about Joey, I've seen Bigfoot twice!! the drone thing ain't happening



I use to see her from time to time. Usually round 2 or 3 in the morning on a Friday or Saturday night.:blink:


----------



## WhackUmStackUm (Jan 31, 2010)

I hope they _*are*_ watching. I would like to see more poachers go to jail and have their fishing gear, boats and trucks confiscated.


----------



## kanaka (Oct 3, 2007)

Here's what they're using. Beware.....


----------



## markw4321 (Oct 4, 2007)

WhackUmStackUm said:


> I hope they _*are*_ watching. I would like to see more poachers go to jail and have their fishing gear, boats and trucks confiscated.


Oh thanc yuu sur. Iffin yuu hadnt shon up here us ignorant hillbilly rec Fisher pepples woulda caught all dem snappas up.


----------



## WhackUmStackUm (Jan 31, 2010)

kanaka said:


> Here's what they're using. Beware.....


Sweet!


----------



## WhackUmStackUm (Jan 31, 2010)

markw4321 said:


> Oh thanc yuu sur. Iffin yuu hadnt shon up here us ignorant hillbilly rec Fisher pepples woulda caught all dem snappas up.


As I have long suspected...


----------



## Mac1528 (Mar 24, 2012)

Orion45 said:


> How does the FWC know he wasn't cleaning the snapper to eat on board his boat? You're allowed 1.5 lbs per person for consumption aboard a vessel...*provided cooking facilities are present*.


How 'bout us sushi folks?


----------



## Downtime2 (Sep 27, 2007)

A drone ID'n fish and people sponsored by FWC and brought to you By Obama hssunsef approved by Bohner and his crew. Sounds legit to me....


----------



## MillerTime (Jul 6, 2011)

Splittine said:


> How come it's always a friend of a friend or I know somebody. You'd think as many members that are on here that someone would have a first hand experience.


If it was actually true then one of our members might have some kind of first hand experience. Until then all of these stories are pure fiction.


----------



## markw4321 (Oct 4, 2007)

WhackUmStackUm said:


> As I have long suspected...



I just find your hand in selling numbers that were previously unknown copper and Pearl belly breeder fish sanctuaries and at the same time your oft "fish police" /evironmental police comments ludicrous and perhaps oxymoronic.


----------



## JoeyWelch (Sep 25, 2009)

Mark some idiots are best ignored.


----------



## Orion45 (Jun 26, 2008)

Mac1528 said:


> How 'bout us sushi folks?


Can't make sushi without rice, therefore....if you have the means to cook rice...you're good to go. 

Ceviche and Sashimi lovers, on the other hand, might be SOL.

I really don't know the answer. I will stop by the FWC office in Pensacola next week and ask.

This earlier thread (Post #8) has the regs listed:

http://www.pensacolafishingforum.com/f21/grills-boat-cooking-deck-92002/


----------



## CatCrusher (Jan 18, 2009)

markw4321 said:


> I just find your hand in selling numbers that were previously unknown copper and Pearl belly breeder fish sanctuaries and at the same time your oft "fish police" /evironmental police comments ludicrous and perhaps oxymoronic.


You keep on and he's gonna buy Alabama and kick your ass out!!!!!


----------



## 192 (Oct 1, 2007)

Gay....all of it.


----------



## Mike aka FishWerks (Oct 22, 2007)

Firefishvideo said:


> I'm gonna give that a tentative BS.
> Not because I think they wouldn't LOVE to do it.....but because I don't think they are capable.
> The entire FWC budget isn't big enough to just buy a few drones.....let alone pay for the support crew.
> ....now I wouldn't put it past ole Obama to divert a few drones away from the border ...and put a thumb on a few republican fisherman!




I agree that it would be much more believable if it happened to one of our own. 

Regarding FFvideos comment on cost; One drone... video feed and cost shared by multiple agencies. And the drone can be much smaller and much more inexpensive then the one in the photo on this thread. If it isn't happening yet it will be in the near future.


----------



## WhackUmStackUm (Jan 31, 2010)

markw4321 said:


> I just find your hand in selling numbers that were previously unknown copper and Pearl belly breeder fish sanctuaries and at the same time your oft "fish police" /evironmental police comments ludicrous and perhaps oxymoronic.


Come on Markie. You know I love you man! :notworthy:


----------



## Firefishvideo (Jul 1, 2010)

Well.... If it were to happen it would be illegal. 
http://www.scribd.com/mobile/doc/124566385
...besides....you are far more likely to run into FWC in the pass than to be targeted by some hightec drone.
Do illegal things...and you will eventually get stung....drone or no drone.


----------



## markw4321 (Oct 4, 2007)

WhackUmStackUm said:


> Come on Markie. You know I love you man! :notworthy:


I love you too whacked.:notworthy:


----------



## sailor (Oct 29, 2007)

I've seen several drones come in off the gulf in the last month. They come back in groups of 2-3 and are prop driven. I'm surprised they are using them for fisheries management but probably when things are slow. Trust me the technology is there to get VERY detailed pictures and you never know you are being watched.


----------



## Kim (Aug 5, 2008)

Right now I say relax and forget about it. The cost to buy/lease, operate and maintain a feasible long range drone program would triple the cost of all state recreational license fees and still require a hefty Federal subsidy to survive. I don't see that happening with the current crop in Congress, they can't balance the budget much less provide the means of detecting a poacher 20 miles offshore.


----------



## jasoncooperpcola (Jan 2, 2008)

I have a solution. Boat to drone artillery. Should be offered as optional equipment.


----------



## sailor (Oct 29, 2007)

Kim said:


> Right now I say relax and forget about it. The cost to buy/lease, operate and maintain a feasible long range drone program would triple the cost of all state recreational license fees and still require a hefty Federal subsidy to survive. I don't see that happening with the current crop in Congress, they can't balance the budget much less provide the means of detecting a poacher 20 miles offshore.


They aren't out there to catch fishermen......that is just additional "training". Be glad drones are flying.


----------



## fishn4real (Sep 28, 2007)

What are the odds? Drone takes photos of boat, in open water, with fishers on-board filleting an identified fish, and then the perps are arrested at dock? 

1. Can the drone see around the side of the boat and get the boat ID number? 
2. Can the drone then tell FWC where the boat will dock, and at what time?


I'm guessing the chances are better of getting struck by lightning.


----------



## hjorgan (Sep 30, 2007)

Hell those asshats in the boat photo helicopter annoy me enough as it is. Drones? Crap those guys in the heli have seen my hairy butt every time they buzz my boat. And that's on porpoise. Imagine what the drones have seen in stealth mode!!!


----------



## Kim (Aug 5, 2008)

I know all the drones flying the GOM are military or DEA missions. They don't care if BillyJoeJimBob is out there filleting and releasing Red Snapper.


----------



## kelly1 (Oct 1, 2007)

jasoncooperpcola said:


> I have a solution. Boat to drone artillery. Should be offered as optional equipment.


There will be a limit of 2 drones shot down per boat.


----------



## SteveFL (Aug 2, 2010)

I have no interest in breaking any laws. If getting fish was the purpose, with gas at $4-$5 a gallon, buying at market price would be the deal. In the mean time, someone wake me when this happens. http://money.cnn.com/2013/06/04/technology/innovation/dominos-pizza-drone/

Now having pizza delivery 20 miles offshore would be nice. :thumbsup:


----------



## jasoncooperpcola (Jan 2, 2008)

SteveFL said:


> I have no interest in breaking any laws. If getting fish was the purpose, with gas at $4-$5 a gallon, buying at market price would be the deal. In the mean time, someone wake me when this happens. http://money.cnn.com/2013/06/04/technology/innovation/dominos-pizza-drone/
> 
> Now having pizza delivery 20 miles offshore would be nice. :thumbsup:


As a Pizza Delivery Driver I spit on that drone!


----------



## SHO-NUFF (May 30, 2011)

Drone -VS- Pier Rat


----------



## Chasin' Tales (Oct 2, 2007)

You will know for sure they are using drones when FWC makes it law that you have to have your boat registration numbers on top of your T-top or otherwise visible from above in addition to being on the side of the hull.


----------



## keperry1182 (Oct 6, 2010)

Depending on the drone, they can take exceptionally high resolution photos and live feed video. One of my jobs in Iraq allowed me the opportunity to see a lot of live feed footage. I could see facial details easily. We also use one called a wasp, fits in a pistol case size box and could easily be launched from a boat sitting nearby. Lots of awesome tech, and thats just USMC shit. Who the hell knows what the airfairies (USAF) have. You can buy a quadcopter and gopro setup for around 600 dollars and have your own drone Lol. Some drones are VERY low cost and well within most of our budgets personally. Drone is a very encompassing term. Goes from the billion dollar global hawk to the 6000 dollar WASP systems. I bet for 200k they could have a badass UAV program that would serve the purpose. They aren't launching weapons afterall. Just being nosey
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/AeroVironment_Wasp_III


----------



## DawnsKayBug (Jul 24, 2013)

I am not saying its true but you guys need to realize there are really small "drones" with a wingspan of 2 -3 feet that the military uses all the time and companies are now marketing to state/local level Law Enforcement. IT doesnt have to be a Global Hawk or Reaper to be a drone although thats what most people think it is. RC plane+Camera=Drone.


----------



## Inn Deep (Oct 3, 2007)

I'm not saying it happened but if true I'd not be surprised if some of the tree hugging organizations would do it and report it to FWC. They have plenty of $$$


----------



## John B. (Oct 2, 2007)

grouper22 said:


> Gay....all of it.


Maybe it's early... but damn I thought this was hilarious.

Sent from my Galaxy S4 using Forum Runner.


----------



## Scardog7 (Oct 11, 2011)

I am sure you have seen this. So, it is possible. Certainly does feel more like spying than law enforcement. No probable cause, etc. Wonder if they know when i am peeing.

"The vessel Peter Gladding and crew along with NOAA officials spent six days in the Dry Tortugas testing an unmanned, remote-controlled drone called, “the Puma AE.” The Puma AE captures images, video, and has infrared capabilities. During the test flight, it was used to map corals, locate turtles, and track migrating birds. While in flight, the small aircraft Puma AE is extremely stealthy and can barely be seen or heard and can be launched, operated, and recovered from small vessels. Because of its numerous attributes, officers were quick to realize that the aircraft is also perfect for law enforcement applications." FWC Report October 2012


----------



## Firefishvideo (Jul 1, 2010)

keperry1182 said:


> Depending on the drone, they can take exceptionally high resolution photos and live feed video. One of my jobs in Iraq allowed me the opportunity to see a lot of live feed footage. I could see facial details easily. We also use one called a wasp, fits in a pistol case size box and could easily be launched from a boat sitting nearby. Lots of awesome tech, and thats just USMC shit. Who the hell knows what the airfairies (USAF) have. You can buy a quadcopter and gopro setup for around 600 dollars and have your own drone Lol. Some drones are VERY low cost and well within most of our budgets personally. Drone is a very encompassing term. Goes from the billion dollar global hawk to the 6000 dollar WASP systems. I bet for 200k they could have a badass UAV program that would serve the purpose. They aren't launching weapons afterall. Just being nosey
> http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/AeroVironment_Wasp_III


Look up the specs on the Wasp.....3 mile range. Not exactly going to be able to make it to a boat and back- even if launched from a nearby vessel.
Any land based drone would have to have a several hundred mile range to be effective. That means BIG and EXPENSIVE.
I know they did the tests down in the Keys...that was documented and released.....but the FWC has adamantly denied using them since them.


----------



## sailor (Oct 29, 2007)

Scardog7 said:


> I am sure you have seen this. So, it is possible. Certainly does feel more like spying than law enforcement. No probable cause, etc. Wonder if they know when i am peeing.
> 
> "The vessel Peter Gladding and crew along with NOAA officials spent six days in the Dry Tortugas testing an unmanned, remote-controlled drone called, “the Puma AE.” The Puma AE captures images, video, and has infrared capabilities. During the test flight, it was used to map corals, locate turtles, and track migrating birds. While in flight, the small aircraft Puma AE is extremely stealthy and can barely be seen or heard and can be launched, operated, and recovered from small vessels. Because of its numerous attributes, officers were quick to realize that the aircraft is also perfect for law enforcement applications." FWC Report October 2012


Hmmm, this could make spotting Cobia in the spring pretty easy.....


----------



## Too Tall 2 (Aug 26, 2009)

http://youtu.be/-NLVwwqDlBQ

Major Nelson and Major Healey are doing fine. No word on Jeannie or her bottle. If you don't get this you're too young.


----------



## Downtime2 (Sep 27, 2007)

Just cut out the middle man. Checked with a friend who actually works there, (Fisher Brown). We got a nice laugh outta it. It always is a friend of a friends roomate twice removed from the in-laws who's dogsitter got busted....


----------



## Kim (Aug 5, 2008)

Bottom line, if you fine tune your tinfoil hats it will make you stealthy to the drone video capabilities. The time, money and LOSS costs of the small short range systems launched from shore and especially a boat make them pretty much useless for FWC purposes. I'm sure that they could do something with a long range high tech system but it's not worth the cost. They would have to raise license fees and then give out enough tickets to support the cost of the program. I just don't think that there are that many poachers out there to justify an expensive program. 

When the world population increases to the point that we have to enforce out territorial limits at sea against foreign fishing vessels this will be the way to do it. UA drones to monitor and manned aircraft and ships to enforce. I think that this is already done on a limited scale at the US/Canadial border with the BFT fishery and in Alaskian waters against the Russians, Chinese and Japanese fishing vessels. Easier, safer and cheaper to long range monitor with a drone than a manned aircraft.


----------



## no woryz (Oct 2, 2007)

I spent some time on the FWC boats last weekend, we discussed lots of stuff and even drones came into the conversation, I was told, if drones are flying, they are federal and not used by the FWC. it seems they're no drones being flown by state... Even talked about the Tortugas, and was told NOAA..... They did have a good laugh about it...


----------



## sniperpeeps (Mar 5, 2011)

I hear they have nuclear submarines on snapper patrol too!


----------



## JoeyWelch (Sep 25, 2009)

Best thing to do is just stay legal. 
Or to the best of your ability anyhow. With all the different laws and regs we have these day's, Ya really don't know for sure one way or the other.


----------



## no woryz (Oct 2, 2007)

sniperpeeps said:


> I hear they have nuclear submarines on snapper patrol too!


Very close, I wasn't going to mention it but the nuclear stealth submarine is being used to catch these guys on here fishing off of fad's using mingo's....


----------



## SteveFL (Aug 2, 2010)

sniperpeeps said:


> I hear they have nuclear submarines on snapper patrol too!


And I just knew I snagged and lost a big ole' grouper last trip out. I guess the para-scope part that came up shoulda' been an indication of what lied below.


----------



## afishanado (Oct 26, 2009)

I suspect that the original author of the story (guy who got arrested/ticketed/whatever) added the "drone" part of the story to try and add "cool points" rather than just admitting he is really just another dumbass who tried to circumvent the rules and regulations and got busted.


----------



## keperry1182 (Oct 6, 2010)

Firefishvideo said:


> Look up the specs on the Wasp.....3 mile range. Not exactly going to be able to make it to a boat and back- even if launched from a nearby vessel.
> Any land based drone would have to have a several hundred mile range to be effective. That means BIG and EXPENSIVE.
> I know they did the tests down in the Keys...that was documented and released.....but the FWC has adamantly denied using them since them.


Im a trained operator of the WASP system, if launched from a nearby vessel it certainly could be used. The question is what its used for. If the USCG was going to board a vessel they could use it to get an eye on the deck of a boat before boarding. These small drones are not for long range long duration recon, its only for "peeking" around a corner. Helpful in an urban environment or ON A BOAT. Do your research and you'll see there is an "aqua WASP" specifically designed for this kind of op. IF YOU SEE A DRONE its probably USN or USCG doing training and not trying to "catch" you being a douche and practicing fillet and release. When I learned to fly the WASP I was at camp Lejeune and we would follow vehicles on the road for practice, and try to see people and what they were doing just for practice. Everybody needs to relax, no one gives a shit what you're doing on your boat.
http://www.navaldrones.com/Aqua-Wasp.html


----------



## keperry1182 (Oct 6, 2010)

Repost, accident


----------



## Firefishvideo (Jul 1, 2010)

keperry1182 said:


> Im a trained operator of the WASP system, if launched from a nearby vessel it certainly could be used. The question is what its used for. If the USCG was going to board a vessel they could use it to get an eye on the deck of a boat before boarding. These small drones are not for long range long duration recon, its only for "peeking" around a corner. Helpful in an urban environment or ON A BOAT. Do your research and you'll see there is an "aqua WASP" specifically designed for this kind of op. IF YOU SEE A DRONE its probably USN or USCG doing training and not trying to "catch" you being a douche and practicing fillet and release. When I learned to fly the WASP I was at camp Lejeune and we would follow vehicles on the road for practice, and try to see people and what they were doing just for practice. Everybody needs to relax, no one gives a shit what you're doing on your boat.
> http://www.navaldrones.com/Aqua-Wasp.html


I can see where it would come in handy for looking around a corner....but at sea - there are no corners....and I can see you coming for up to 8 miles away. With a 3 mile range...you would have to be no more than 1 mile away to launch and recover....you would be better off with some high powered glass.


----------



## keperry1182 (Oct 6, 2010)

Its not for a fishing boat, think of the deck on a shipping container ship . Its so operators can see behind defalade on the deck of a ship. Nobody is trying to be sneaky.


----------



## fishn4real (Sep 28, 2007)

afishanado said:


> I suspect that the original author of the story (guy who got arrested/ticketed/whatever) added the "drone" part of the story to try and add "cool points" rather than just admitting he is really just another dumbass who tried to circumvent the rules and regulations and got busted.


Ding, ding, ding. Yep, "stupid is as stupid does". Got caught and then had to come up with this bs to try and show that he was not as stupid as he really is. :whistling:


----------



## Kim (Aug 5, 2008)

This will defeat those dastardly drones,


----------



## dockmaster (Sep 27, 2007)

I'm not a lawyer but I dont know if a drone by the FWC or even the CG would pass the probable cause test in court, or anything else a lawyer could put at them. 
Its basically a stoplight camera in the air, and those art fairing very well in court challenges.


----------



## Flguy32514 (Sep 16, 2012)

dockmaster said:


> I'm not a lawyer but I dont know if a drone by the FWC or even the CG would pass the probable cause test in court, or anything else a lawyer could put at them.
> Its basically a stoplight camera in the air, and those art fairing very well in court challenges.


What probable cause? Everything they can see with a drone is out in the open. If I'm not mistaken (and I might be) you have to have an expectation of privacy, anything in plain view does not have expectation of privacy its not illegal for them to look at you


----------

