Frequently Asked Questions

Questions and Answers

Even after more than a year, I often get asked a lot of questions. Because of this, I have decided to create a list of frequently asked questions and my responses: 

Why did you create this blog? This blog was created to initiate change. Game and Fish published their side of events with the deliberate intention to mislead you. They omitted and added information to make me appear guilty. For example, they left out the fact they refused to review my evidence which included the walleye itself. Game and Fish intentionally left out key witness statements in their report. For example, they intentionally left out images, videos and statements from the officers who verified my walleye. Then, Game and Fish made a "conclusion" without any evidence. If that wasn't bad enough, they didn't allow me to appeal their decision or defend myself in court which violated my Due Process. This blog is providing you with all of the information. If there are areas where you believe changes could be made, advocate for those changes. More information can be found in the Welcome Post of this blog. 

Was the walleye foul-hooked? NO. I do not believe the walleye was foul-hooked, and the physical condition of the walleye supports this. There is no hole from a hook on the back, body, fins or tail. The only damage from a hook is in the mouth of the walleye. I have provided many images and videos throughout this blog proving this point. 

Were you charged with a crime or found guilty of keeping a foul-hooked walleye? G&F issued me a written warning. I was never charged with a crime or able to take my case to court. There was no evidence showing where my walleye was hooked when it was landed, and it was never proven my walleye was foul-hooked. I was not allowed to appeal their decision and was not able to take my case to court. 

What evidence did Game and Fish use to issue you a written warning? Game and Fish didn't provide any evidence to prove where my walleye was hooked at the time it was caught and netted. There is no image, no video and not even an official witness statement providing any evidence as to the location of the hook at that time. The physical condition of the walleye is this: there is a large hole in the upper jaw, string burn on the cheek pointing to the hole in the upper jaw and NO hole in the tail, back or body of the fish. The physical condition of the walleye supports it was hooked legally. The Game and Fish investigator was offered the walleye to inspect on May 10th, and he refused to look at it. This conversation is recorded and posted in this blog.

Did you provide evidence to Game and Fish to back up your side of events? On May 10th, I offered Game and Fish my evidence which included images, video and even the walleye itself. The investigator refused my evidence stating, "my investigation is closed." This conversation was recorded and can be heard in Post 28. I also provided several emails after May 10th asking Game and Fish to take a second look at things. This included images, videos, recorded statements, statements from others fishing in the area, etc. They refused to do anything. I even requested a meeting with the Governor and the Director of Game and Fish. 

Did Game and Fish inspect the walleye? I offered the G&F investigator my evidence which included images, video and even the walleye itself on May 10th. The investigator refused my evidence stating, "my investigation is closed." Just so you are all aware, an investigation in never closed until the statute of limitation has passed. To add insult to injury, they omitted the fact I offered my evidence in their Investigation Report which was published in the news - yet again, making me appear guilty. This conversation is recorded and can be heard in Post 28. 

Did you cooperate with Game and Fish during the investigation? Yes, I did cooperate. I sent Game and Fish information and images up until the investigator stated my walleye was "under investigation" and implied a "violation" occurred. After these statements by the investigator, I could no longer provide them information. This is when I hired an attorney. Read Post 12 for more information. 

Did Game and Fish lie? The investigator stated there were witnesses who would testify in court as to seeing the walleye foul-hooked when it was caught. Turns out, this was a lie. There was NO witness willing or able to provide an official statement or testify in court as to the location of the hook when my walleye was caught and netted. Read Post 7 for more information. 

Did the witnesses lie about your walleye? Yes. The only witness who officially spoke out against my walleye (Matthew Knuth) lied - and this can easily be proven with my images and videos and the physical condition of the walleye itself. There were no other witnesses who provided an official statement. If you read the Investigation Report, you may  be confused by this. There were several people listed as "involved" or as "witnesses." However, this was done to mislead you. Read Post 30, 31 and 32. 

What did the taxidermist say about the walleye? The taxidermist reviewed the physical condition of my walleye and documented it with images. His conclusion was, "There is a fresh tear in the mouth of the walleye. That is for sure. There is also a deep tear in the soft dorsal fin which has scar tissue between the rays. It is an old wound, and I don't believe it could have been hooked there. Neither the back, body or tail have any holes or damage so it could not have been hooked there." Based on this information, his expert conclusion was, "The fish was most likely hooked in the mouth when it was caught. The deep tear in the soft dorsal fin was most likely caused when the string got caught in the old tear of the fin further splitting the fin. This would have caused the fish to fight all kittywampus (similar to being wrapped in the string). This is especially true if you use braided line." EXACTLY. Furthermore, if the hook popped out of the fish's mouth in the net, the hook would have followed the string right up to the tear in the soft dorsal fin. But even if you don't want to believe this, it proves reasonable doubt. The taxidermist came to this conclusion without ever looking at the investigation report or my statements. He didn't even know what kind of string I was using which is braided. Read Post 2 describing how the walleye was caught.  

Are you mad at the witnesses who spoke out against you? Yes and No. I have always encouraged people to speak up if they witness something however, if you witness something and feel the need to contact law enforcement, be very sure of what you witnessed. Don't assume you saw something, don't make statements based on perceptions and make sure you are willing to testify in court. The only witness who provided an official statement against my walleye blatantly lied. I can easily prove he lied with my images, videos and the physical condition of the walleye. This does make me mad. What upsets me even more is the fact the investigator didn't use the evidence in his possession to prove the witness lied (read Post 6 and 31). In fact, the investigator believed the false statements more than the true statements made by the law enforcement officer who netted the walleye. I want witnesses who provided false information during the investigation to be held accountable for their actions which is a crime in North Dakota.  

Did you get to keep the walleye? Yes. There was no evidence to prove my walleye was foul-hooked when it was caught. This is why I believe I was only issued a warning and not charged. There is no direct evidence proving where the hook was located at the time it was netted and caught - no images, no video and not even an official witness statement. So, I didn't "get to keep the walleye." It was always mine and remains mine. I had an exact replica made by a very experienced taxidermist which hangs on my wall. It turned out great!

Would you ever submit another fish for a record? I am not sure, and it will depend entirely on the situation. Game and Fish needs a better process in place for verifying records, and people need to be held accountable for false statements. When these things happen, I may submit for another record. I was close this spring when I caught a small mouth bass that was 1.75" longer than the current state record. I sent a text to Game and Fish letting them know how close I was. 

Why do you feel G&F issued you a warning and took away the record? First, I was issued a warning because there was no evidence showing where my walleye was hooked at the time it was caught. Secondly, G&F knows a person can't fight a written warning in court which means, there wasn't any way for me to prove my side. Lastly, I feel the investigator held onto a bias from the very beginning believing my walleye was foul-hooked. He was lead to believe this because of the false witness statements. The investigator had many opportunities to prove the witness (Matthew Knuth) lied which he didn't do. He had many opportunities to prove the person who netted the fish was telling the truth which he didn't do. The investigator could have conducted a more thorough investigation by interviewing the two officers who verified my walleye and anyone else who witnessed the physical condition of the walleye. The investigator could have accepted my evidence and the walleye when I offered it to him on May 10th. The investigator could have included all of the information in his report (specifically the information which supported my walleye was caught legally) for the State's Attorney to review such as their own videos and images taken when the walleye was verified. There are a lot of things which should have been done differently. Read Post 44 for more information. 

Why did you hire an attorney? I hired an attorney because, the investigator made the statement my walleye was "under investigation" and "Gibbs was witness to the violation." These statements inferred the investigator was not looking for more information to prove my walleye was hooked in the mouth. They were looking for information to prove it was foul-hooked. I did what I had to do to protect myself against the bias of the investigator's statement and any possible criminal charges. Read Post 12 for more information. 

#northdakotaslargestwalleye #volkswalleye #justiceforthelargestwalleye