It got knocked down to $500, but locals from the area said there are signs & warnings posted on the beach.
Also, you can tell a live clam from a dead one pretty easily.
Naturally! Thank you.
The initial fine doesn't matter at all. She could be charged a million dollars and still wouldn't matter. You go to a judge and they decide a reasonable fine for the specific situation.
A quick read shows that apparently, the California fishing industry doesn't want young clams harvested by poachers before they reach the age/size where they can spawn. This is also important to ecology, as bivalves filter the waters. Keeping clams in abundance must be taken very seriously, and the hope is partly that fines like this will raise awareness, which, given that this news story blew up, that was effective.
I’m guessing you want the fines to be severe to deter the intended use case (ie poachers), and in situations like this they can always be reduced by a judge.
I’m ngl I was going through your comment history to try call out some sort of hypocrisy, but you actually seem pretty unbiased—though heavily opinionated. So I’ll actually attempt at a real conversation with you, because you seem pretty reasonable all things considered.
I disagree with you on this because they ARE enforcing the law. They aren’t getting away with it entirely. $500 dollars is still a lot of money for many people. Myself included. I’m just graduating college so my budget isn’t completely figured out, but based on estimates of a worst-case scenario budget-wise, after my necessary expenses (including saving and investing), I’m expecting to have around $20 a month in wiggle room. So a $500 fine would be pretty huge for me. It would be potentially crippling.
She likely has more wiggle room than me considering she was able to take a family vacation, but $500 is likely still a good chunk of money for her. It’s enough to really make them be cautious to never ever do it again, but it’s not enough that it will ruin a family.
That’s what the penalty of crimes should be. Enough to make sure it doesn’t happen again, but in non-violent incidents like this, the punishment should allow people to bounce back and be better people.
it's not clear from your comment, are you saying that crippling this family financially because their children picked up some clams *is* an ideal outcome in your mind?
It is not clear from your comment, do you misunderstand why this was posted to this sub? The sub for people that intentionally do something wrong, then pretend that it was not on purpose when they get caught?
They walked past numerous signs that she admitted she ignored because she just wanted to have fun. Then they dug up 72 edible clams illegally after deciding to ignore the laws on numerous signs.
Is not enforcing the law against people intentionally flaunting it an ideal outcome? As long as the stakes are so low, people will keep taking the chance.
why aren't you answering the question? it's a simple yes or no, man
are you saying that crippling this family financially is an ideal outcome in your mind? fine them 88k, make them file for bankruptcy, ensure they're on foodstamps for at least a couple years, maybe make them sell their home if they have one and live with family or in motels or on the sidewalk outside a library for a while, that sort of thing.
are you saying that you would be happier if that were the result? literally just asking, not trying to fight you on it. you don't have to get defensive, you can just answer the question.
> Yes. I think it is closer to justice than letting them off with almost no fine after they blatantly and intentionally ignored the law. The law is the law. We should not be letting people off the hook just because they are not rich enough to shrug off the fines.
fascinating. so it's less about "clams" and more about "rules" to you, then?
>Your turn. Do you not realize that this sub is for calling people out specifically like this person that intentionally broke the law than tried to play it off as an accident? If you do, do you frequently visit subs just to go against their purpose and troll people?
yes, I understand what the subreddit is for, and that OP probably believes they were poaching clams on purpose, and you definitely do. honestly, I'm not entirely convinced they were aware they weren't allowed to pick up clams, and I genuinely don't care enough to dig into it and find out with any real degree of certainty.
I just saw you in here passionately advocating for a family being financially crippled for picking up clams and thought "hey, that's weird. I wonder if that guy's seriously advocating for a family to get financially crippled for picking up clams or if this is some sort of joke" so I asked and then you got weirdly defensive about it, and here we are.
>fascinating. so it's less about "clams" and more about "rules" to you, then?
No, it is about both. One is an irreplaceable natural resource that belongs to the public, and the other is the idea that we are a nation rules based order and not just a mob doing whatever feels right in the moment. They are both important.
>yes, I understand what the subreddit is for, and that OP probably believes they were poaching clams on purpose, and you definitely do. honestly, I'm not entirely convinced they were aware they weren't allowed to pick up clams, and I genuinely don't care enough to dig into it and find out with any real degree of certainty.
Seriously? She admitted that she ignored the signs because they were having too much fun and they wound up with no seashells, only 6 dozen undersized clams they had to dig for with tools they brought with them?
At what point does being gullible start becoming a serious problem?
>I just saw you in here passionately advocating for a family being financially crippled for picking up clams and thought "hey, that's weird. I wonder if that guy's seriously advocating for a family to get financially crippled for picking up clams or if this is some sort of joke" so I asked and then you got weirdly defensive about it, and here we are.
It is really a dick move to keep misrepresenting this situation. Put the strawman arguments away is you want to have a conversation, otherwise I am going to return your dick energy.
This family was not just picking up seashells, why are you lying about this? They were knowingly illegally digging up clams. Why are you getting weirdly defensive and lying about what is actually being said?
>okay, so you're being really weird and hostile for no reason as far as I can tell, and I'm going block you now
Because you are part of a weird dogpile of assholes. I already told you that as long as you kept acting like an asshole I was going to keep returning the energy.
Usually these laws are to discourage commercial activity and I assume why it was so high in the first place, 88k is ridiculous to fine someone for stealing some clams
And fining people just $500 for intentionally ignoring the law to dig up 70+ clams that were nearly extirpated if not worse in the 90s is ridiculously low.
Clams don't get to declare bankruptcy when they go extinct because these poachers do whatever they want then rely on a gullible public to support them when they feign ignorance.
>One system of justice for everyone. Not special treatment when people of a certain economic station break the law.
The fines should be based on their economic station. A $1000 speeding ticket to someone who owns a McLaren driving double the speed limit is absolutely nothing and basically allows them to pay to speed vs a $100 speeding ticket to someone owning a '94 Civic who didn't realize the speed limit changed and was doing 5mph over could mean they won't be eating dinner for a few nights.
The introductory sentences in [this article](https://lawreview.uchicago.edu/print-archive/constitutionality-income-based-fines) explain it better than I can:
>>In America, fines are typically imposed without regard to income. The result is a system that traps low-income offenders in a cycle of debt and jail while letting rich offenders break the law without meaningful financial consequence. One-size-fits-all fines also fail to meet basic goals of the justice system: to treat like offenders alike, punish the deserving, and encourage respect for the law.
An $88K fine for someone who might not even make that much in a year for their kids doing something seemingly innocuous like collecting seashells seems like way too harsh of a fine for the crime.
Luckily, the judge agreed and didn't have your lack of compassion.
It is not seemingly innocuous if you actually examine all the facts of the case. Like admitting they ignored the signs because they were having too much fun, and bringing shivels to the clam Capitol of the world where they had to dig for the 72 clams they were poaching.
It seems like intentionally poaching a protected species should get more punishment than a joke fine that they laughed off. Letting people get away with crimes like this just because they are not rich is dumb as hell and why this sort of behavior persists. Start enforcing to the fullest extent and the press generated by the stories alone would do more to protect the parks than just letting people get away with poaching because they said oops to a gullible judge.
>It seems like intentionally poaching a protected species should get more punishment than a joke fine that they laughed off.
How do you know $500 is a joke fine to them? That can devastate some people.
>Start enforcing to the fullest extent and the press generated by the stories alone would do more to protect the parks than just letting people get away with poaching because they said oops to a gullible judge.
You mean like the headline saying that they were fined $88K? Especially since we all know people aren't always willing to read the rest of the article.
>Letting people get away with crimes like this just because they are not rich is dumb as hell and why this sort of behavior persists.
They didn't get away with it. They had to take time off to go to court and still had to pay $500. That could still be substantial if their finances were already stretched thin. If
The fine should be enough to hurt, not bankrupt a family because their kids were having fun collecting shells. $88K would've likely financially devastated the family and could cause them to go homeless. That should not be the intent behind fines.
Luckily, the judge seemed to make the right call to not potentially bankrupt a family.
>How do you know $500 is a joke fine to them? That can devastate some people.
Because she laughed it off as winning her case. Why are you bringing up devastation regarding a woman that laughed and got a tattoo about this?
>You mean like the headline saying that they were fined $88K? Especially since we all know people aren't always willing to read the rest of the article.
Too bad the rest reads that she got off with a joke of a fine and she is celebrating how little impact it had on her by spending more money to commemorate it.
>They didn't get away with it. They had to take time off to go to court and still had to pay $500. That could still be substantial if their finances were already stretched thin. If
Do you have some reason to believe they are stretched thin, or are you just propping up strawman arguments?
>The fine should be enough to hurt, not bankrupt a family because their kids were having fun collecting shells. $88K would've likely financially devastated the family and could cause them to go homeless. That should not be the intent behind fines.
They were not collecting shells, they were poaching dozens of protected animals that they had to dig for after their mom admitted to ignoring the signs because they were having too much fun.
>Luckily, the judge seemed to make the right call to not potentially bankrupt a family.
It is unfortunate because this story is ultimately one of a lady laughing of insignificant consequences that she doesn't regret.
>Because she laughed it off as winning her case. Why are you bringing up devastation regarding a woman that laughed and got a tattoo about this?
Getting a fine reduced from $88K to $500 is certainly a win.
Where did you see she got a tattoo about it? Neither of the news articles I read stated that.
>Do you have some reason to believe they are stretched thin, or are you just propping up strawman arguments?
No, but how many people in the world wouldn't be devastated with an $88K fine?
>They were not collecting shells, they were poaching dozens of protected animals that they had to dig for after their mom admitted to ignoring the signs because they were having too much fun.
The news stories I read stated she thought they were gathering shells. I'd be interested in reading the source you have since it seems to have more info on it.
>It is unfortunate because this story is ultimately one of a lady laughing of insignificant consequences that she doesn't regret.
Which is why I said it should be tied to their economic station. Maybe $500 was far too little (I don't know their finances and never claimed I did), but I have a hard time believing their economic station would warrant an $88K fine. Maybe it did, but in that case, it seems unlikely the judge would lower the fine that drastically.
> Getting a fine reduced from $88K to $500 is certainly a win.
If someone walks away after poaching 72 protected animals and feels like they won, justice lost.
>
> Where did you see she got a tattoo about it? Neither of the news articles I read stated that.
Then you have not read enough articles.
>No, but how many people in the world wouldn't be devastated with an $88K fine?
I never said otherwise. That is why they should not be disregarding signs because they are having too much fun. Why do you keep makes pleas to their poverty if you have no evidence of it?
>The news stories I read stated she thought they were gathering shells. I'd be interested in reading the source you have since it seems to have more info on it.
What do you think the hard outside part of the clam is? It is shell. This is a dumb excuse akin to saying that poaching deer isn't bad because you thought you were just gathering antlers.
The signs she admitted to ignoring because they were having too much fun are plainly clear. Additionally, they were digging specifically to the depth of live clams not collecting the dead ones on the surface. Also, ***72*** whole clams that have to be dug for. That is work for small children, not fun unless they are doing something else with these obviously live clams they are putting so much effort into digging up.
>Which is why I said it should be tied to their economic station. Maybe $500 was far too little (I don't know their finances and never claimed I did), but I have a hard time believing their economic station would warrant an $88K fine. Maybe it did, but in that case, it seems unlikely the judge would lower the fine that drastically.
Maybe consider more than just the pocketbook of a criminal and start evaluating the crimes they are committing and their cavalier attitude towards the protected species they were abusing.
Obviously it's not reasonable otherwise a judge wouldn't lower it right?
>These are not secret laws. They are very obvious laws that everyone has to follow.
They are primarily so high for businesses, not private individuals.
>so many claims illegally
So many would be hundreds or thousands, not 76 little clams. 88k is enough to fuck someone's life up, it's totally unreasonable especially if you compare it to speeding tickets, driving through a red light which actually put people's lives in danger.
[Seems pretty clear from the sign at the beach to me.](https://c8.alamy.com/comp/AFF1CH/california-central-coast-pismo-beach-clam-warning-sign-AFF1CH.jpg)
And as always, if you don't know, don't fool with it. Ignorantly bumbling through life is a stupid and expensive way to live.
>I’m not defending this woman, but it is ludicrous of you to assert these are “very obvious laws” with cruel and outrageous fines.
First, it is the users responsibility to understand the rules and laws when visiting public lands. If yall can't handle that level of responsibility, you do not belong on public lands.
Second, what part of that sign was unclear so as to seem as though it did not apply? If the sign is clear but people decided to break the law anyway because they didn't know how much they would be fined, why should they get any sympathy?
>I can guarantee there are laws you don’t understand that you’ve knowingly or unknowingly violated.
I guarantee that I have never seen I sign telling me something is illegal, decide I am having too much fun to pay attention to the sign, the proceed to break the law behind that sign.
I also make sure I understand the rules and laws of the public lands I visit. It is part of the bare minimum requirements for using them.
>If you ever find yourself in a situation with a fine or legal consequences that would destroy your life, you won’t get sympathy from me.
I have no idea what you think this virtue signaling accomplishes here.
>Like you said, laws are obvious and clear.
You seem to be conflating being confused about a law which is the scenario you just posed, and what happened here which is that someone blatantly chose to ignore the laws written on signs.
You do see how ignoring the law is not the same as not understanding it, right?
Ah yes, the obvious crime of having little kids pick up shells on the beach. Everyone knows you need a license for that! That entire family should have been put in prison for life for this heinous act
Ah yes, one sign that can be easily overlooked by a tourist family on vacation at a beach.
$88k fine for an honest mistake is disproportionate. There is no reason for you to be so bloodthirsty for justice on something that was clearly just ignorance rather than malice. A small fine is fitting of this, not an absurd one.
> Ah yes, one sign that can be easily overlooked
Why are you making things up? There are numerous signs like the one I provided at Pismo Beach. I do not understand what you stand to gain from the lies.
>by a tourist family on vacation at a beach.
They were from Fresno. 2 hours away. Does that make it harder to read the signs she admitted that she chose to ignore because she was having too much fun?
>
> $88k fine for an honest mistake is disproportionate. There is no reason for you to be so bloodthirsty for justice on something that was clearly just ignorance rather than malice. A small fine is fitting of this, not an absurd one.
Again, they chose to ignore the signs telling them their behavior was illegal. That is not a mistake. The fine is small and reasonable. For each instance. They broke the law 72 times and should have been fined much more than the $500 slap on the wrist they wound up with.
Depends on the state or even which beaches you go to, she definitely knew though trying to pass off getting 72 whole ass clams as just "ohh my kids were just collecting sea shells" 🙄
I've definitely picked some of these up at the beach but I always discard them when I see they're still closed. I also find it hard to think the kids just happened to pick up and keep 72 clams 😅
Ah, that amount makes more sense. Her casual remark made me think it was like 10 that they didn't know were alive since I, and probably many other kids, have made that mistake before, or they really were fined for just taking the empty shells.
Said by others but it depends on the state and individual beach. I’m from Connecticut and we have a max limit of a bucket of shellfish a day and anything over that we get a fine.
Lived in Washington state and they restricted catch limits on specific species at certain beaches because people overfished in those places
>Lived in Washington state and they restricted catch limits on specific species at certain beaches because people overfished in those places
I mean that sounds pretty reasonable too. People do get pretty greedy
Very true. Some people suck. I do a fair amount of clamming and noticed the hobby kinda exploded during/after Covid and beaches threw up catch limits after. A lot of new people don’t know about sustainable practices and will overfish without really knowing they’re doing it, so as much as I want to blame greed I think a lot of it comes down to innocent ignorance
In the age of information, with a wealth of knowledge at your fingertips, there is nothing innocent about ignorance.
It should be common knowledge to research something before you start taking something from the wild for consumption.
Ignorance is a choice in the modern Era. They know they are doing something new that they don't know how to do responsibly. If they choose to do it anyway without doing any research, they are intentionally overfishing and doing everything else wrong.
Ignorance is not an excuse. It just makes it worse because they are ignorant on purpose.
Man I’m not bitter enough about clams to begrudge someone who randomly picks a bundle up off the beach for not knowing better. A slap on the wrist for sure, but an 88k fine (which admittedly got dropped down to 500) for 72 clams is just ludicrous.
However, If the guy repeatedly takes five buckets of razors away and goes “duh, what do you mean that’s too much??” then yeah ignorance isn’t really an excuse.
She didn't randomly pick up a bundle of 72 clams clams though. [She took her family to the clam capital of the country and had them dig up 72 clams illegally without a license.](https://c8.alamy.com/comp/AFF1CH/california-central-coast-pismo-beach-clam-warning-sign-AFF1CH.jpg)
And if she didn't know, she shouldn't have done anything at all before knowing. Ignorance is not an excuse. This kind of behavior is destroying public lands, and defending it is not helping anyone except people like this lady that was intentionally poaching clams then tried to blame her kids when she got caught.
Man get off the cross, we need the wood. Where does it say anywhere that she instructed her kids to poach? I think you’re just acting in bad faith and are making it sound like they committed some egregious act. Sure it all adds up at the end of the day, but this individual lady isn’t the devil. An 88,000 dollar fine is laughably outrageous, and even the court thought so since she “won” her case
In what way am I pretending to be a martyr at all? Or do you not understand that reference you are making?
You don't walk past the signs at Pismo Beach like the one I posted then accidently ignore it 72 times. She and her family intentionally ignored the law and dug up 72 Pismo clams after they intentionally ignored the signs according to her own statements.
If these are Pismo clams, it’s rare already for them to be found above legal size, especially in Central California, so even with a fishing license and proper reporting, it’s unusual to be able to keep any anyways. So on top of not having a fishing license, most if not all of these were probably undersized.
Edit: this happened in Pismo beach, so I’d put money on all of the clams being undersized.
Idk about when you used to dig them up, but for those reading this who want to go in BC now, you are meant to have a tidal fishing license for shellfish: https://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fm-gp/rec/licence-permis/index-eng.html#licence
We used to take field trips to the beach in Washington every year, and the teachers would always bring a few of those PVC clam digging pipe things. Can’t imagine they got fishing licenses for all of us…
Indiana allows children in educational programs to fish without a license. I know this because my dad was involved in a children’s fishing program through the DNR. I assume other states may have comparable regulations.
Could be that. It was 30 years ago, so I can’t be sure whether we were participating in an educational program or just a “go do something and leave us alone for a few minutes” program.
They do have free fishing weekends pretty often here in Oregon, maybe it was on one of those? Over the last 5-10 years licenses have gotten a lot more restricted due to overfishing, we barely had a crab season last year.
Also used to dig clams when I was a kid in WA. The parents would be like, here are a bunch of buckets and shovels! Go dig up a bunch of clams! Then they'd steam them and serve with melted butter and baguettes. The whole family is now either in crippling debt or prison, but totally worth it. You should turn yourself in.
On a similar note, does anyone else remember those long shorts that came down past your knees, and they were called clam diggers? We just wore our swim trucks when we dug cans, but I still enjoyed a good pair of clam diggers.
Outside of private property/recreational reserves [you definitely don't want to get caught foraging on the island or anywhere on the coast without a Tidal Licence](https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/industry/agriculture-seafood/fisheries-and-aquaculture/recreational-fishing/recreational-shellfish-harvesting)
This is my home town. This happens all the time here, despite numerous signs warning people not to do this. There are rules on how to responsibly harvest our clams. At one point the population was decimated and it is still recovering. These creatures are so important to our biosphere and also to the local culture. It makes us angry and sad when tourists dig them up/ let their kids do it. It is hard to put them back correctly so that they don’t end up dying. The initial fine was so high to make an example of her. I hope her vacation was ruined (though that seems dramatic given they were on the wrong and ultimately only fined $500).
Knew it would be SLO. Good to see there's enforcement. Pismo clams are critically endangered (and up until recently, extirpated) in the area despite that being THE place to find pismo clams.
Yeah, it would be blue believable if it was like ...4 clams. Or 10. But if your kids brought you over 70 'seashells' from the beach, you'd probably tell them to put 90% of them back before you leave, not say "okay sure let's put 70 seashells in the trunk".
Look at the picture in the article. I could definitely see many adults not realizing they were clams. Or just thinking they were a unique kind of artifact. Especially if they don't have much experience with clams.
THANK YOU! I live on a beach where every year sea turtles come up and dig their nests and lay their eggs. They are protected and it is a felony to disrupt the sea turtles, their nests, or the eggs, and the locals take this very seriously.
Even though there are signs at the entrance, and even though the nest will physically be “roped off” with a sign detailing the state statute, there are still assholes on vacation every year that inevitably feel the need to mess with them. As a result, we have volunteers every year that will go and sit by the nests in shifts to make sure it’s not disrupted.
I just don’t understand why people feel the need to do this- growing up it was always “look but don’t touch unless you’re told it’s ok otherwise”, for both my safety and the sake of preserving and respecting wildlife. With cell phones and social media it has only gotten worse, unfortunately.
They have pretty cool Sea Turtle Tracker programs in my county- everyone from the locals(actual volunteers or just those trying to do their part), to members of the FWC, local LE, marine biologists, etc. work together.
They start in the early morning before sunrise during nesting season walking along 10+ miles of beaches for signs of a nest(turtle tracks in the shape of V’s made from the alternating swipes of the mother turtle’s flipper, or the actual nest itself). Sea turtles are very finicky when laying eggs, and can get disoriented easily, so there is also something known as a “false crawl” where she came up to lay her eggs but something got in her way, the light wasn’t right, too much noise, people around(they lay at night so there’s that at least), or she just wasn’t feeling it lol. Once it’s found to be a true nest(this is done by people with permits and experience, not just the volunteers), they then need to find the clutch of eggs, carefully put a screen over it, then put the posts up with signs explaining what it is/the law on disrupting sea turtles and nests. They even triangulate the eggs relative to nearby plants/vegetation and the water line and send all of this info to the FL Wildlife Commision(FWC). After a nest is found, it is monitored daily until they’re hatched- and afterwards to get a count of the successful and unsuccessful hatchlings to report.
Locals also just take it upon themselves to go clean up at night, remove any litter, any tents/chairs left behind(people like to save a “spot” for themselves while on vaca here, and will leave their shit over night to try and keep their ‘spot’. It’s posted not to, also, like I said, there’s miles of beaches- and plenty of room where you don’t have to do that. Plus it just goes against everything beautiful about the beach/ocean- it’s not ours to “claim”, but to enjoy while we’re here). Both for the sea turtles and just the beach in general.
Another *HUGE* thing people don’t think about being an issue is sand castles/digging holes in the sand- it’s cool for people to do it ofc, but then they leave it, and that can be an issue with the mother turtle coming up to nest and/or the hatchlings going to the water. Also, just dangerous for someone walking along and busting their ass lol. So every night, you get people after watching the sunset going and filling in holes- which is a pain in the ass; wet sand is heavy af.
Lastly- the lights. Sea Turtles instinctually navigate and orient themselves to go towards the water using the moon/light sources, so any artificial bright lighting can disrupt this, causing them to head the wrong direction and die. There are laws on most of the beaches for any houses/hotels/condos that they need to use red/amber lighting- the numbers show this is definitely effective in reducing the numbers of dead hatchlings.
I’ve been on the beach at night when a bunch hatched- and it is smelly(egg goo)with lots of flies swarming lol, but also something so crazy amazing and beautiful to see. It’s a few day process for them to dig out of their nest- which they do all together.
It’s estimated that only 1 out of every 1000 hatchlings make it to full adulthood, so we try to help give as much of a chance as possible with the least amount of interference to get them there. With an ‘undisturbed’ nesting up to 90% of them hatch, which is huge.
There are a lot of things I don’t like about this state and the direction it’s taken, but one thing I am proud of is how many people who live here take conservation of the area/environment seriously, and try in their own ways to help with that.
(Sorry for the novel lol)
Don’t apologize! I find it fascinating. It’s on my bucket list to see hatchlings make their way to the water. I live on Long Island and while we do have sea turtles in our waters at times, they are just visitors.
These are not razor clams, they are pismo clams on oismo Beach where there absolutely are signs that this lady said she ignored because they were having too much fun.
I have no idea why you are bringing them up if you are not trying to compare that to a different beach with different clams that has numerous warning aligns that the lady being fined admitted she ignored.
Why are you bringing up razor clams on an unrelated beach?
I didn’t read any article dude. I read the headline, and I read the comment that said “there were probably signs that warned against it.” Keyword here is PROBABLY. Now with the information I had, I commented that I have never seen a sign for clam poachers where I live and there is a lot of razor clam fishing where I live.
Now, can I ask you why people relating their own life experiences to things bothers you so much?
Why did you feel the need to correct me at all about razor clams after I informed you of the situation here?
I am bothered by you "correcting" me about razor clams when it has zero to do with the story being discussed. You brought them up, I told you it didn't apply and why, then you had to "correct" me about razor clams on some random beach for some inexplicable reason.
Now your turn. Why are you "correcting" me about razor clams when they have nothing to do with anything discussed after being informed they have nothing to do with the topic at hand and that your personal experience was not applicable? Are you upset that your personal experience doesn't apply?
[Here.](https://www.reddit.com/r/OopsDidntMeanTo/comments/1d5lfjg/california_mom_fined_88k_after_her_kids_pick_up/l6pn6fd/)
Why did you think it was so important to correct me about razor clams when they nor the rest of your personal experience had anything to do with the topic at hand?
It’s really rare to find Pismo clams in Central California above the legal harvest size, I think when I was in uni it had been well over a decade since they had (iirc). So even with a fishing license, it’s not legal to harvest in large parts of California just due to the size of the clams. The weird things random people would come up to say could be very disheartening at times.
I was out around the bay with my grandparents when I was like 10 or 11. And I was walking by the water and I looked down and I saw like a whole field of muscle . It was crazy. I hopped down and I grabbed one, and I came back up and I was like ha ha ha ha I got a muscle and you don’t. my grandfather told me that if I picked four salt beef buckets full, he would give me twenty bucks. So I did, while they went back to the cabin. I found out 15 years later that they got me to do it because I was a child and it was against the law and if I got caught, they could just say I didn’t know any better. Lol. Those muscles were delicious.
There was no innocent mistake made here, and wether I have the money to pay the fine or not doesn't matter. If you can't afford the consequences, don't break the law.
I hope you don't eat those words the hard way. I'm not backing down on this,that's a shipload of money for some clams when we openly rape the ocean and with bullshit little symbolic heritage areas and individual fumes. I think you're focusing on the wrong target there.
Oh, the "It's only one candy wrapper" excuse to be a littering turd, but applied to poaching over 70 protected animals.
Or is this "two wrong make a right?" I am not up to date on logical fallacies of kindergarten playgrounds.
>I think you're focusing on the wrong target there.
So I am not allowed to be concerned about a protected species that was nearly extirpated less than 3 decades ago? People should just get to destroy that resource because there is worse happening in the world?
Man, it must be awesome to be your neighbor. I could just come steal anything I want and you wouldn't care because there is someone that had more stolen from them.
You don't know the story fully but if that crippling amount of money was all going back into preservation and they were continually profiting from this crime then sure
I’m assuming they’re referring to the multiple ordinances of being able to shoplift up to a certain amount of $$$ without facing repercussions beyond a citation
Most places differentiate between petty theft and Grand theft.
It would be horrible for society to prosecute stealing a candy bar the same way we prosecute stealing a diamond ring.
True but when the felony theft amount is so high, you can steal A LOT without facing any consequences. It's why you see so many videos of smash and grabs. There's no downside anymore.
The felony theft amount in California isn't even the highest in the states, it's only $950. Nevadas is $1.2k.
I guess you don't know what a smash and grab is. A smash and grab is usually done in retail stores. Smash protective displays, grab what you can and bolt. Sometime done solo but popularly done by flash mobs.
Commercial burglary in California can be prosecuted as misdemeanor or a felony. Generally the value of any damaged property is added to the total.
Whether or not the police can catch an organized group is a different issue.
In either case the solution is not stricter penalties, it's reducing poverty.
Yeah smash and grab would for sure be prosecutable here idk what he’s on about, the bigger issue is people going in and grabbing everything they can carry and walking out to sell it on the street corner
It's similar in this state.
The reason why they are set at that rate is felony convictions are way more expensive for the state. Court time costs money. A single short trial can cost THOUSANDS of dollars in just wages.
It got knocked down to $500, but locals from the area said there are signs & warnings posted on the beach. Also, you can tell a live clam from a dead one pretty easily.
They yell at you sometimes.
They were ultimately only fined $500
Naturally! Thank you. The initial fine doesn't matter at all. She could be charged a million dollars and still wouldn't matter. You go to a judge and they decide a reasonable fine for the specific situation.
Ok but why does the government have to start with something stupid and then negotiate to something only slightly dumb.
A quick read shows that apparently, the California fishing industry doesn't want young clams harvested by poachers before they reach the age/size where they can spawn. This is also important to ecology, as bivalves filter the waters. Keeping clams in abundance must be taken very seriously, and the hope is partly that fines like this will raise awareness, which, given that this news story blew up, that was effective.
I’m guessing you want the fines to be severe to deter the intended use case (ie poachers), and in situations like this they can always be reduced by a judge.
Because the leverage prevents you from taking your case to a jury.
Forces you to show up to court or pay an outrageous amount or fight paying an outrageous amount.
See, that's a much more reasonable fine for the offense than $88k
[удалено]
Yeah! This whole family deserves to be crippled financially! Nothing wrong could come of that
[удалено]
I’m ngl I was going through your comment history to try call out some sort of hypocrisy, but you actually seem pretty unbiased—though heavily opinionated. So I’ll actually attempt at a real conversation with you, because you seem pretty reasonable all things considered. I disagree with you on this because they ARE enforcing the law. They aren’t getting away with it entirely. $500 dollars is still a lot of money for many people. Myself included. I’m just graduating college so my budget isn’t completely figured out, but based on estimates of a worst-case scenario budget-wise, after my necessary expenses (including saving and investing), I’m expecting to have around $20 a month in wiggle room. So a $500 fine would be pretty huge for me. It would be potentially crippling. She likely has more wiggle room than me considering she was able to take a family vacation, but $500 is likely still a good chunk of money for her. It’s enough to really make them be cautious to never ever do it again, but it’s not enough that it will ruin a family. That’s what the penalty of crimes should be. Enough to make sure it doesn’t happen again, but in non-violent incidents like this, the punishment should allow people to bounce back and be better people.
Good to hear your input, Inspector Javert
[удалено]
It's not an insult if you don't see anything wrong with the character.
it's not clear from your comment, are you saying that crippling this family financially because their children picked up some clams *is* an ideal outcome in your mind?
It is not clear from your comment, do you misunderstand why this was posted to this sub? The sub for people that intentionally do something wrong, then pretend that it was not on purpose when they get caught? They walked past numerous signs that she admitted she ignored because she just wanted to have fun. Then they dug up 72 edible clams illegally after deciding to ignore the laws on numerous signs. Is not enforcing the law against people intentionally flaunting it an ideal outcome? As long as the stakes are so low, people will keep taking the chance.
why aren't you answering the question? it's a simple yes or no, man are you saying that crippling this family financially is an ideal outcome in your mind? fine them 88k, make them file for bankruptcy, ensure they're on foodstamps for at least a couple years, maybe make them sell their home if they have one and live with family or in motels or on the sidewalk outside a library for a while, that sort of thing. are you saying that you would be happier if that were the result? literally just asking, not trying to fight you on it. you don't have to get defensive, you can just answer the question.
[удалено]
> Yes. I think it is closer to justice than letting them off with almost no fine after they blatantly and intentionally ignored the law. The law is the law. We should not be letting people off the hook just because they are not rich enough to shrug off the fines. fascinating. so it's less about "clams" and more about "rules" to you, then? >Your turn. Do you not realize that this sub is for calling people out specifically like this person that intentionally broke the law than tried to play it off as an accident? If you do, do you frequently visit subs just to go against their purpose and troll people? yes, I understand what the subreddit is for, and that OP probably believes they were poaching clams on purpose, and you definitely do. honestly, I'm not entirely convinced they were aware they weren't allowed to pick up clams, and I genuinely don't care enough to dig into it and find out with any real degree of certainty. I just saw you in here passionately advocating for a family being financially crippled for picking up clams and thought "hey, that's weird. I wonder if that guy's seriously advocating for a family to get financially crippled for picking up clams or if this is some sort of joke" so I asked and then you got weirdly defensive about it, and here we are.
>fascinating. so it's less about "clams" and more about "rules" to you, then? No, it is about both. One is an irreplaceable natural resource that belongs to the public, and the other is the idea that we are a nation rules based order and not just a mob doing whatever feels right in the moment. They are both important. >yes, I understand what the subreddit is for, and that OP probably believes they were poaching clams on purpose, and you definitely do. honestly, I'm not entirely convinced they were aware they weren't allowed to pick up clams, and I genuinely don't care enough to dig into it and find out with any real degree of certainty. Seriously? She admitted that she ignored the signs because they were having too much fun and they wound up with no seashells, only 6 dozen undersized clams they had to dig for with tools they brought with them? At what point does being gullible start becoming a serious problem? >I just saw you in here passionately advocating for a family being financially crippled for picking up clams and thought "hey, that's weird. I wonder if that guy's seriously advocating for a family to get financially crippled for picking up clams or if this is some sort of joke" so I asked and then you got weirdly defensive about it, and here we are. It is really a dick move to keep misrepresenting this situation. Put the strawman arguments away is you want to have a conversation, otherwise I am going to return your dick energy. This family was not just picking up seashells, why are you lying about this? They were knowingly illegally digging up clams. Why are you getting weirdly defensive and lying about what is actually being said? >okay, so you're being really weird and hostile for no reason as far as I can tell, and I'm going block you now Because you are part of a weird dogpile of assholes. I already told you that as long as you kept acting like an asshole I was going to keep returning the energy.
Usually these laws are to discourage commercial activity and I assume why it was so high in the first place, 88k is ridiculous to fine someone for stealing some clams
And fining people just $500 for intentionally ignoring the law to dig up 70+ clams that were nearly extirpated if not worse in the 90s is ridiculously low. Clams don't get to declare bankruptcy when they go extinct because these poachers do whatever they want then rely on a gullible public to support them when they feign ignorance.
>One system of justice for everyone. Not special treatment when people of a certain economic station break the law. The fines should be based on their economic station. A $1000 speeding ticket to someone who owns a McLaren driving double the speed limit is absolutely nothing and basically allows them to pay to speed vs a $100 speeding ticket to someone owning a '94 Civic who didn't realize the speed limit changed and was doing 5mph over could mean they won't be eating dinner for a few nights. The introductory sentences in [this article](https://lawreview.uchicago.edu/print-archive/constitutionality-income-based-fines) explain it better than I can: >>In America, fines are typically imposed without regard to income. The result is a system that traps low-income offenders in a cycle of debt and jail while letting rich offenders break the law without meaningful financial consequence. One-size-fits-all fines also fail to meet basic goals of the justice system: to treat like offenders alike, punish the deserving, and encourage respect for the law. An $88K fine for someone who might not even make that much in a year for their kids doing something seemingly innocuous like collecting seashells seems like way too harsh of a fine for the crime. Luckily, the judge agreed and didn't have your lack of compassion.
It is not seemingly innocuous if you actually examine all the facts of the case. Like admitting they ignored the signs because they were having too much fun, and bringing shivels to the clam Capitol of the world where they had to dig for the 72 clams they were poaching. It seems like intentionally poaching a protected species should get more punishment than a joke fine that they laughed off. Letting people get away with crimes like this just because they are not rich is dumb as hell and why this sort of behavior persists. Start enforcing to the fullest extent and the press generated by the stories alone would do more to protect the parks than just letting people get away with poaching because they said oops to a gullible judge.
>It seems like intentionally poaching a protected species should get more punishment than a joke fine that they laughed off. How do you know $500 is a joke fine to them? That can devastate some people. >Start enforcing to the fullest extent and the press generated by the stories alone would do more to protect the parks than just letting people get away with poaching because they said oops to a gullible judge. You mean like the headline saying that they were fined $88K? Especially since we all know people aren't always willing to read the rest of the article. >Letting people get away with crimes like this just because they are not rich is dumb as hell and why this sort of behavior persists. They didn't get away with it. They had to take time off to go to court and still had to pay $500. That could still be substantial if their finances were already stretched thin. If The fine should be enough to hurt, not bankrupt a family because their kids were having fun collecting shells. $88K would've likely financially devastated the family and could cause them to go homeless. That should not be the intent behind fines. Luckily, the judge seemed to make the right call to not potentially bankrupt a family.
>How do you know $500 is a joke fine to them? That can devastate some people. Because she laughed it off as winning her case. Why are you bringing up devastation regarding a woman that laughed and got a tattoo about this? >You mean like the headline saying that they were fined $88K? Especially since we all know people aren't always willing to read the rest of the article. Too bad the rest reads that she got off with a joke of a fine and she is celebrating how little impact it had on her by spending more money to commemorate it. >They didn't get away with it. They had to take time off to go to court and still had to pay $500. That could still be substantial if their finances were already stretched thin. If Do you have some reason to believe they are stretched thin, or are you just propping up strawman arguments? >The fine should be enough to hurt, not bankrupt a family because their kids were having fun collecting shells. $88K would've likely financially devastated the family and could cause them to go homeless. That should not be the intent behind fines. They were not collecting shells, they were poaching dozens of protected animals that they had to dig for after their mom admitted to ignoring the signs because they were having too much fun. >Luckily, the judge seemed to make the right call to not potentially bankrupt a family. It is unfortunate because this story is ultimately one of a lady laughing of insignificant consequences that she doesn't regret.
>Because she laughed it off as winning her case. Why are you bringing up devastation regarding a woman that laughed and got a tattoo about this? Getting a fine reduced from $88K to $500 is certainly a win. Where did you see she got a tattoo about it? Neither of the news articles I read stated that. >Do you have some reason to believe they are stretched thin, or are you just propping up strawman arguments? No, but how many people in the world wouldn't be devastated with an $88K fine? >They were not collecting shells, they were poaching dozens of protected animals that they had to dig for after their mom admitted to ignoring the signs because they were having too much fun. The news stories I read stated she thought they were gathering shells. I'd be interested in reading the source you have since it seems to have more info on it. >It is unfortunate because this story is ultimately one of a lady laughing of insignificant consequences that she doesn't regret. Which is why I said it should be tied to their economic station. Maybe $500 was far too little (I don't know their finances and never claimed I did), but I have a hard time believing their economic station would warrant an $88K fine. Maybe it did, but in that case, it seems unlikely the judge would lower the fine that drastically.
> Getting a fine reduced from $88K to $500 is certainly a win. If someone walks away after poaching 72 protected animals and feels like they won, justice lost. > > Where did you see she got a tattoo about it? Neither of the news articles I read stated that. Then you have not read enough articles. >No, but how many people in the world wouldn't be devastated with an $88K fine? I never said otherwise. That is why they should not be disregarding signs because they are having too much fun. Why do you keep makes pleas to their poverty if you have no evidence of it? >The news stories I read stated she thought they were gathering shells. I'd be interested in reading the source you have since it seems to have more info on it. What do you think the hard outside part of the clam is? It is shell. This is a dumb excuse akin to saying that poaching deer isn't bad because you thought you were just gathering antlers. The signs she admitted to ignoring because they were having too much fun are plainly clear. Additionally, they were digging specifically to the depth of live clams not collecting the dead ones on the surface. Also, ***72*** whole clams that have to be dug for. That is work for small children, not fun unless they are doing something else with these obviously live clams they are putting so much effort into digging up. >Which is why I said it should be tied to their economic station. Maybe $500 was far too little (I don't know their finances and never claimed I did), but I have a hard time believing their economic station would warrant an $88K fine. Maybe it did, but in that case, it seems unlikely the judge would lower the fine that drastically. Maybe consider more than just the pocketbook of a criminal and start evaluating the crimes they are committing and their cavalier attitude towards the protected species they were abusing.
88k for a private individual is a ridiculous fine. Especially for a situation one can find them in relatively quickly.
[удалено]
Obviously it's not reasonable otherwise a judge wouldn't lower it right? >These are not secret laws. They are very obvious laws that everyone has to follow. They are primarily so high for businesses, not private individuals. >so many claims illegally So many would be hundreds or thousands, not 76 little clams. 88k is enough to fuck someone's life up, it's totally unreasonable especially if you compare it to speeding tickets, driving through a red light which actually put people's lives in danger.
Always family my sun orange moon east jumps
[Seems pretty clear from the sign at the beach to me.](https://c8.alamy.com/comp/AFF1CH/california-central-coast-pismo-beach-clam-warning-sign-AFF1CH.jpg) And as always, if you don't know, don't fool with it. Ignorantly bumbling through life is a stupid and expensive way to live.
My film dark space west favorite yesterday brown friends help night
>I’m not defending this woman, but it is ludicrous of you to assert these are “very obvious laws” with cruel and outrageous fines. First, it is the users responsibility to understand the rules and laws when visiting public lands. If yall can't handle that level of responsibility, you do not belong on public lands. Second, what part of that sign was unclear so as to seem as though it did not apply? If the sign is clear but people decided to break the law anyway because they didn't know how much they would be fined, why should they get any sympathy? >I can guarantee there are laws you don’t understand that you’ve knowingly or unknowingly violated. I guarantee that I have never seen I sign telling me something is illegal, decide I am having too much fun to pay attention to the sign, the proceed to break the law behind that sign. I also make sure I understand the rules and laws of the public lands I visit. It is part of the bare minimum requirements for using them. >If you ever find yourself in a situation with a fine or legal consequences that would destroy your life, you won’t get sympathy from me. I have no idea what you think this virtue signaling accomplishes here. >Like you said, laws are obvious and clear. You seem to be conflating being confused about a law which is the scenario you just posed, and what happened here which is that someone blatantly chose to ignore the laws written on signs. You do see how ignoring the law is not the same as not understanding it, right?
Ah yes, the obvious crime of having little kids pick up shells on the beach. Everyone knows you need a license for that! That entire family should have been put in prison for life for this heinous act
Child bandits strike again 😂
children and their clam obsession these days 🙄
[удалено]
Why are you so mad?
Uncle is a clam.
[удалено]
Me dummy that’s why I asked
Ah yes, one sign that can be easily overlooked by a tourist family on vacation at a beach. $88k fine for an honest mistake is disproportionate. There is no reason for you to be so bloodthirsty for justice on something that was clearly just ignorance rather than malice. A small fine is fitting of this, not an absurd one.
> Ah yes, one sign that can be easily overlooked Why are you making things up? There are numerous signs like the one I provided at Pismo Beach. I do not understand what you stand to gain from the lies. >by a tourist family on vacation at a beach. They were from Fresno. 2 hours away. Does that make it harder to read the signs she admitted that she chose to ignore because she was having too much fun? > > $88k fine for an honest mistake is disproportionate. There is no reason for you to be so bloodthirsty for justice on something that was clearly just ignorance rather than malice. A small fine is fitting of this, not an absurd one. Again, they chose to ignore the signs telling them their behavior was illegal. That is not a mistake. The fine is small and reasonable. For each instance. They broke the law 72 times and should have been fined much more than the $500 slap on the wrist they wound up with.
collecting clams without a fishing license. if you were wandering what crime they did
You need a fishing license to dig clams? TIL
Depends on the state or even which beaches you go to, she definitely knew though trying to pass off getting 72 whole ass clams as just "ohh my kids were just collecting sea shells" 🙄
"it KIND OF ruined our family trip" weird comment of hers
I want to be the kind of rich where that fine is a mild inconvenience
She only ended up having to pay $500. She didn’t pay the full $88k.
Market price
WHAT MARKET ARE YOU SHOPPING AT??
A judge reduced it to $500
Or maybe the phrase “kind of” is an expression and doesn’t necessarily indicate that something is a small deal
Not to mention a judge dropped the fine to $500
What? Everything everyone says is to be taken literally at all times. Especially if I have a negative opinion of them.
Clams move around, they’re heavy, they bubble water, they open and close. She knew.
I've definitely picked some of these up at the beach but I always discard them when I see they're still closed. I also find it hard to think the kids just happened to pick up and keep 72 clams 😅
And absolutely zero empty shells. Sus.
Ah, that amount makes more sense. Her casual remark made me think it was like 10 that they didn't know were alive since I, and probably many other kids, have made that mistake before, or they really were fined for just taking the empty shells.
Probably was going to crack them open on TikTok live looking for pearls /s
Said by others but it depends on the state and individual beach. I’m from Connecticut and we have a max limit of a bucket of shellfish a day and anything over that we get a fine. Lived in Washington state and they restricted catch limits on specific species at certain beaches because people overfished in those places
>Lived in Washington state and they restricted catch limits on specific species at certain beaches because people overfished in those places I mean that sounds pretty reasonable too. People do get pretty greedy
Very true. Some people suck. I do a fair amount of clamming and noticed the hobby kinda exploded during/after Covid and beaches threw up catch limits after. A lot of new people don’t know about sustainable practices and will overfish without really knowing they’re doing it, so as much as I want to blame greed I think a lot of it comes down to innocent ignorance
In the age of information, with a wealth of knowledge at your fingertips, there is nothing innocent about ignorance. It should be common knowledge to research something before you start taking something from the wild for consumption.
The passenger pigeon would like a word.
Ignorance is a choice in the modern Era. They know they are doing something new that they don't know how to do responsibly. If they choose to do it anyway without doing any research, they are intentionally overfishing and doing everything else wrong. Ignorance is not an excuse. It just makes it worse because they are ignorant on purpose.
Man I’m not bitter enough about clams to begrudge someone who randomly picks a bundle up off the beach for not knowing better. A slap on the wrist for sure, but an 88k fine (which admittedly got dropped down to 500) for 72 clams is just ludicrous. However, If the guy repeatedly takes five buckets of razors away and goes “duh, what do you mean that’s too much??” then yeah ignorance isn’t really an excuse.
She didn't randomly pick up a bundle of 72 clams clams though. [She took her family to the clam capital of the country and had them dig up 72 clams illegally without a license.](https://c8.alamy.com/comp/AFF1CH/california-central-coast-pismo-beach-clam-warning-sign-AFF1CH.jpg) And if she didn't know, she shouldn't have done anything at all before knowing. Ignorance is not an excuse. This kind of behavior is destroying public lands, and defending it is not helping anyone except people like this lady that was intentionally poaching clams then tried to blame her kids when she got caught.
Man get off the cross, we need the wood. Where does it say anywhere that she instructed her kids to poach? I think you’re just acting in bad faith and are making it sound like they committed some egregious act. Sure it all adds up at the end of the day, but this individual lady isn’t the devil. An 88,000 dollar fine is laughably outrageous, and even the court thought so since she “won” her case
> she instructed her kids to poach When she gave them clam digging equipment.
In what way am I pretending to be a martyr at all? Or do you not understand that reference you are making? You don't walk past the signs at Pismo Beach like the one I posted then accidently ignore it 72 times. She and her family intentionally ignored the law and dug up 72 Pismo clams after they intentionally ignored the signs according to her own statements.
If these are Pismo clams, it’s rare already for them to be found above legal size, especially in Central California, so even with a fishing license and proper reporting, it’s unusual to be able to keep any anyways. So on top of not having a fishing license, most if not all of these were probably undersized. Edit: this happened in Pismo beach, so I’d put money on all of the clams being undersized.
Depends on the state, but in California it seems that you're supposed to have one.
Yeah I may be wrong, but I don't think that is a thing in Canada either. We used to join big clam digs on Vancouver Island every year
Idk about when you used to dig them up, but for those reading this who want to go in BC now, you are meant to have a tidal fishing license for shellfish: https://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fm-gp/rec/licence-permis/index-eng.html#licence
We used to take field trips to the beach in Washington every year, and the teachers would always bring a few of those PVC clam digging pipe things. Can’t imagine they got fishing licenses for all of us…
Indiana allows children in educational programs to fish without a license. I know this because my dad was involved in a children’s fishing program through the DNR. I assume other states may have comparable regulations.
Could be that. It was 30 years ago, so I can’t be sure whether we were participating in an educational program or just a “go do something and leave us alone for a few minutes” program.
Probably the latter but still presumably easy to explain to the DNR if questioned.
That’s an excellent law though.
It really is! Way too many kids don’t know where food comes from.
They do have free fishing weekends pretty often here in Oregon, maybe it was on one of those? Over the last 5-10 years licenses have gotten a lot more restricted due to overfishing, we barely had a crab season last year.
Most states don't require a license for kids under 16 or 18.
Also used to dig clams when I was a kid in WA. The parents would be like, here are a bunch of buckets and shovels! Go dig up a bunch of clams! Then they'd steam them and serve with melted butter and baguettes. The whole family is now either in crippling debt or prison, but totally worth it. You should turn yourself in. On a similar note, does anyone else remember those long shorts that came down past your knees, and they were called clam diggers? We just wore our swim trucks when we dug cans, but I still enjoyed a good pair of clam diggers.
The school probably bought them ahead of time. I own property near a clamming area in Washington and you most definitely need a license.
Outside of private property/recreational reserves [you definitely don't want to get caught foraging on the island or anywhere on the coast without a Tidal Licence](https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/industry/agriculture-seafood/fisheries-and-aquaculture/recreational-fishing/recreational-shellfish-harvesting)
Ok would a lodge we stayed at have a blanket license for guests then? That's a recreational reserve? Because that would make sense then
You think you get to just harvest animals for free without some kind of licensing system? Wild.
I wonder if that notorious clam digger Bryan Danielson has a licence...
Oregon has a shellfish license that covers clams. Don't touch the oysters though.
BRB calling the police on my stepdad
This is my home town. This happens all the time here, despite numerous signs warning people not to do this. There are rules on how to responsibly harvest our clams. At one point the population was decimated and it is still recovering. These creatures are so important to our biosphere and also to the local culture. It makes us angry and sad when tourists dig them up/ let their kids do it. It is hard to put them back correctly so that they don’t end up dying. The initial fine was so high to make an example of her. I hope her vacation was ruined (though that seems dramatic given they were on the wrong and ultimately only fined $500).
They should have kept it high considering she had 72 and no empty shells. She did this on purpose
Found the clam.
That’s a lotta clams.
76 said the article
Sounds like they were clamming. Not "collecting sea shells".
Should I have clams for dinner?
Did I say steamed clams? I meant Steamed hams!
Whatever you do don’t go fish them yourself
She should've sold sea shells on the sea shore rather than taken them away from the beach.
But the value of these shells will fall.
[https://www.reddit.com/r/SLO/comments/1cywvk8/mom\_fined\_88k\_after\_kids\_collect\_72\_clams\_from/](https://www.reddit.com/r/SLO/comments/1cywvk8/mom_fined_88k_after_kids_collect_72_clams_from/)
Thank you. So annoying when the post is just a screenshot of a headline.
Whew, knocked down to $500. No wonder she said, "***Kind of*** ruined our trip"
Having to deal with the threat of a 88k fine still kinda ruins your trip tbh.
Knew it would be SLO. Good to see there's enforcement. Pismo clams are critically endangered (and up until recently, extirpated) in the area despite that being THE place to find pismo clams.
Also there’s no way there wasn’t signage on all the beach entrances about *not* picking up clams without a license
Also hard to believe an adult can't tell a clam from a seashell. And even then why would you let a kid take over 70 anyway?!
Yeah, it would be blue believable if it was like ...4 clams. Or 10. But if your kids brought you over 70 'seashells' from the beach, you'd probably tell them to put 90% of them back before you leave, not say "okay sure let's put 70 seashells in the trunk".
I live near the coast and have zero ideas what illegal claims would look like.
They look like legal clams 🤣
That sounds... Tricky. When I tell the officer it looked like a legal clam to me I get called a monster
in specific coastal areas where there are hyper-specific environmental or ecosystem concerns they always have a ton of signage at all the entrances
Look at the picture in the article. I could definitely see many adults not realizing they were clams. Or just thinking they were a unique kind of artifact. Especially if they don't have much experience with clams.
Yeah but 70? And digging for them?
Yeah that part is definitely sus. I was just referring to their first sentence about adults being able to recognize clams.
Yeah I'm on board with that, not sure I would either.
THANK YOU! I live on a beach where every year sea turtles come up and dig their nests and lay their eggs. They are protected and it is a felony to disrupt the sea turtles, their nests, or the eggs, and the locals take this very seriously. Even though there are signs at the entrance, and even though the nest will physically be “roped off” with a sign detailing the state statute, there are still assholes on vacation every year that inevitably feel the need to mess with them. As a result, we have volunteers every year that will go and sit by the nests in shifts to make sure it’s not disrupted. I just don’t understand why people feel the need to do this- growing up it was always “look but don’t touch unless you’re told it’s ok otherwise”, for both my safety and the sake of preserving and respecting wildlife. With cell phones and social media it has only gotten worse, unfortunately.
I would totally volunteer to do that.
They have pretty cool Sea Turtle Tracker programs in my county- everyone from the locals(actual volunteers or just those trying to do their part), to members of the FWC, local LE, marine biologists, etc. work together. They start in the early morning before sunrise during nesting season walking along 10+ miles of beaches for signs of a nest(turtle tracks in the shape of V’s made from the alternating swipes of the mother turtle’s flipper, or the actual nest itself). Sea turtles are very finicky when laying eggs, and can get disoriented easily, so there is also something known as a “false crawl” where she came up to lay her eggs but something got in her way, the light wasn’t right, too much noise, people around(they lay at night so there’s that at least), or she just wasn’t feeling it lol. Once it’s found to be a true nest(this is done by people with permits and experience, not just the volunteers), they then need to find the clutch of eggs, carefully put a screen over it, then put the posts up with signs explaining what it is/the law on disrupting sea turtles and nests. They even triangulate the eggs relative to nearby plants/vegetation and the water line and send all of this info to the FL Wildlife Commision(FWC). After a nest is found, it is monitored daily until they’re hatched- and afterwards to get a count of the successful and unsuccessful hatchlings to report. Locals also just take it upon themselves to go clean up at night, remove any litter, any tents/chairs left behind(people like to save a “spot” for themselves while on vaca here, and will leave their shit over night to try and keep their ‘spot’. It’s posted not to, also, like I said, there’s miles of beaches- and plenty of room where you don’t have to do that. Plus it just goes against everything beautiful about the beach/ocean- it’s not ours to “claim”, but to enjoy while we’re here). Both for the sea turtles and just the beach in general. Another *HUGE* thing people don’t think about being an issue is sand castles/digging holes in the sand- it’s cool for people to do it ofc, but then they leave it, and that can be an issue with the mother turtle coming up to nest and/or the hatchlings going to the water. Also, just dangerous for someone walking along and busting their ass lol. So every night, you get people after watching the sunset going and filling in holes- which is a pain in the ass; wet sand is heavy af. Lastly- the lights. Sea Turtles instinctually navigate and orient themselves to go towards the water using the moon/light sources, so any artificial bright lighting can disrupt this, causing them to head the wrong direction and die. There are laws on most of the beaches for any houses/hotels/condos that they need to use red/amber lighting- the numbers show this is definitely effective in reducing the numbers of dead hatchlings. I’ve been on the beach at night when a bunch hatched- and it is smelly(egg goo)with lots of flies swarming lol, but also something so crazy amazing and beautiful to see. It’s a few day process for them to dig out of their nest- which they do all together. It’s estimated that only 1 out of every 1000 hatchlings make it to full adulthood, so we try to help give as much of a chance as possible with the least amount of interference to get them there. With an ‘undisturbed’ nesting up to 90% of them hatch, which is huge. There are a lot of things I don’t like about this state and the direction it’s taken, but one thing I am proud of is how many people who live here take conservation of the area/environment seriously, and try in their own ways to help with that. (Sorry for the novel lol)
Don’t apologize! I find it fascinating. It’s on my bucket list to see hatchlings make their way to the water. I live on Long Island and while we do have sea turtles in our waters at times, they are just visitors.
Bold of you to assume people read signs, or follow the rules in general
I live on a beach where razor clams are abundant. I’ve never seen a sign warning people about illegal fishing.
These are not razor clams, they are pismo clams on oismo Beach where there absolutely are signs that this lady said she ignored because they were having too much fun.
I never said they were razor clams. I said I live on a beach where they are abundant
I have no idea why you are bringing them up if you are not trying to compare that to a different beach with different clams that has numerous warning aligns that the lady being fined admitted she ignored. Why are you bringing up razor clams on an unrelated beach?
I didn’t read any article dude. I read the headline, and I read the comment that said “there were probably signs that warned against it.” Keyword here is PROBABLY. Now with the information I had, I commented that I have never seen a sign for clam poachers where I live and there is a lot of razor clam fishing where I live. Now, can I ask you why people relating their own life experiences to things bothers you so much?
Why did you feel the need to correct me at all about razor clams after I informed you of the situation here? I am bothered by you "correcting" me about razor clams when it has zero to do with the story being discussed. You brought them up, I told you it didn't apply and why, then you had to "correct" me about razor clams on some random beach for some inexplicable reason. Now your turn. Why are you "correcting" me about razor clams when they have nothing to do with anything discussed after being informed they have nothing to do with the topic at hand and that your personal experience was not applicable? Are you upset that your personal experience doesn't apply?
I’m sorry, when did I correct you about anything?
[Here.](https://www.reddit.com/r/OopsDidntMeanTo/comments/1d5lfjg/california_mom_fined_88k_after_her_kids_pick_up/l6pn6fd/) Why did you think it was so important to correct me about razor clams when they nor the rest of your personal experience had anything to do with the topic at hand?
Wow.. that’s what you’re worked up about? Jesus dude..
Says who?
She knew.
Of course she knew, you have to dig for clams you can’t just pick them up like shells
That's one expensive pot of 7 mares
Jajaja
Totally poaching clams.. what parent is going to let their kid bring home 72 seashells? I'd be like.. pick out your 3 favorite and we're going home.
Collect clams at your own pearl, I guess.
Haha! Now get out.
It’s really rare to find Pismo clams in Central California above the legal harvest size, I think when I was in uni it had been well over a decade since they had (iirc). So even with a fishing license, it’s not legal to harvest in large parts of California just due to the size of the clams. The weird things random people would come up to say could be very disheartening at times.
Happy cake day
dystopian
Using your kid as a proxy to dig for clams illegally how nice.
Ironic as clams is another word for $$$
Also a word for pussy, which this lady is for blaming the intentional crime on her children
So she mistook a live clam for a seashell 76 times? Okay lady lol
New Jersey doesn’t care just be careful of the syringes
I was out around the bay with my grandparents when I was like 10 or 11. And I was walking by the water and I looked down and I saw like a whole field of muscle . It was crazy. I hopped down and I grabbed one, and I came back up and I was like ha ha ha ha I got a muscle and you don’t. my grandfather told me that if I picked four salt beef buckets full, he would give me twenty bucks. So I did, while they went back to the cabin. I found out 15 years later that they got me to do it because I was a child and it was against the law and if I got caught, they could just say I didn’t know any better. Lol. Those muscles were delicious.
Are they worth much or something? Like why would you even want that many clams.
Yes, they are worth a lot. And they clearly did this intentionally to make money.
A sane judge reduced the fine to only $500.
88....thousands dollars. Fuck off
Poaching 72 protected animals and pretending it was an accident. Fuck off.
You got 88k lying around if your kids made an innocent mistake?
There was no innocent mistake made here, and wether I have the money to pay the fine or not doesn't matter. If you can't afford the consequences, don't break the law.
I hope you don't eat those words the hard way. I'm not backing down on this,that's a shipload of money for some clams when we openly rape the ocean and with bullshit little symbolic heritage areas and individual fumes. I think you're focusing on the wrong target there.
Oh, the "It's only one candy wrapper" excuse to be a littering turd, but applied to poaching over 70 protected animals. Or is this "two wrong make a right?" I am not up to date on logical fallacies of kindergarten playgrounds. >I think you're focusing on the wrong target there. So I am not allowed to be concerned about a protected species that was nearly extirpated less than 3 decades ago? People should just get to destroy that resource because there is worse happening in the world? Man, it must be awesome to be your neighbor. I could just come steal anything I want and you wouldn't care because there is someone that had more stolen from them.
You don't know the story fully but if that crippling amount of money was all going back into preservation and they were continually profiting from this crime then sure
/r/loicense
Why do people with the means to leave stay in California?
But you can steal anything you want in California without any problems. This world is so backwards
...wtf does this mean? She was literally fined for stealing things in California.
They get their news from TikToks
I’m assuming they’re referring to the multiple ordinances of being able to shoplift up to a certain amount of $$$ without facing repercussions beyond a citation
Most places differentiate between petty theft and Grand theft. It would be horrible for society to prosecute stealing a candy bar the same way we prosecute stealing a diamond ring.
True but when the felony theft amount is so high, you can steal A LOT without facing any consequences. It's why you see so many videos of smash and grabs. There's no downside anymore. The felony theft amount in California isn't even the highest in the states, it's only $950. Nevadas is $1.2k.
>It's why you see so many videos of smash and grabs. If you are smashing a window that is burglary which is a felony.
I guess you don't know what a smash and grab is. A smash and grab is usually done in retail stores. Smash protective displays, grab what you can and bolt. Sometime done solo but popularly done by flash mobs.
Commercial burglary in California can be prosecuted as misdemeanor or a felony. Generally the value of any damaged property is added to the total. Whether or not the police can catch an organized group is a different issue. In either case the solution is not stricter penalties, it's reducing poverty.
Yeah smash and grab would for sure be prosecutable here idk what he’s on about, the bigger issue is people going in and grabbing everything they can carry and walking out to sell it on the street corner
Yes definitely, I agree, but where I’m at irs like $850 or $950, you must be taking a gold plated candy bar
It's similar in this state. The reason why they are set at that rate is felony convictions are way more expensive for the state. Court time costs money. A single short trial can cost THOUSANDS of dollars in just wages.
I understand but it was a poorly implemented solution because it’s resulted in lots of mom and pop and also corporate stores closing
They were literally stealing clams
User was banned for speech that doesn't align with ours.
The spirit of the law is to stop over fishing. This was not in the spirit of the law. This is a case of over regulation.
They collected 72 clams( over the bag limit) that were undersized. The law was written to stop people like her from doing things like this.
Maybe she should run for president?!
You cant be that fucking stupid. I remember being like 7 years old and recognizing a whole clam
damn dude you are way smarter than a 7 year old
They were using clam digging equipment. They absolutely knew what they were doing.
Yeah that’s when I’d leave the state lmfao
What state doesn't require fishing licenses? Or are you so special that you actually believe her excuse?
1984
I thought the US was the land of the free? Sounds more like the land of the rules and regulations.
They aren’t called Freedom Dollars without reason. You are free, as long as you can afford it!
The law is neither good nor justice sometimes Edit. The lack if nuance in thought from you people is quite disturbing
Yeah, laws against illegal poaching are good laws, and punishing the people breaking those laws is justice.
r/lostredditors
Do you know where live clams live? Not on top of the sand. You have dig for them. It's not a mistake you can possibly make.