FWC Says a Ukrainian Couple’s Fishing Trip Turned Into a Criminal Investigation After a Protected Tarpon Was Found in a Bucket

FWC Says a Ukrainian Couple’s Fishing Trip Turned Into a Criminal Investigation After a Protected Tarpon Was Found in a Bucket

A fishing trip at Bahia Honda State Park in the Florida Keys turned into a criminal investigation after witnesses reported that a Ukrainian couple had caught and kept a protected tarpon, which a Florida wildlife officer later found sitting inside a bucket beside their vehicle.

The video from the bodycam channel FWC Body Cam documents the encounter involving Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Officer Paris Winter, who responded after park visitors said they had seen the fish being removed from the water and carried away.

Because the couple spoke little English, Winter used an approved Ukrainian-language interpretation service while explaining that tarpon are protected in Florida and generally cannot be killed or possessed without the proper authorization and tag.

One of the two people eventually admitted catching the fish, according to the footage, and the officer issued him a notice to appear in court rather than taking him to jail. The tarpon was seized and documented, while the couple also received a warning after officers learned they did not have the required fishing license.

Witnesses Reported the Fish Before the Couple Left

The investigation began after several visitors approached a park employee and said they had watched the couple catch the tarpon from a nearby bridge.

When Winter arrived, the employee described the pair as pleasant and suggested that they may not have understood the seriousness of the violation, but said several witnesses had reported seeing the man catch the fish.

The original witnesses had already left by the time the officer reached the park, so the employee could not provide their names or obtain written statements from them. She had remained near the couple, however, because she was concerned that they might leave before an officer arrived.

The employee also told Winter that the woman initially suggested the fish had already been there, although the witnesses reportedly gave a different account.

Winter then walked toward the vehicle and found the couple standing nearby, with the bucket containing the tarpon close to the car.

The physical presence of the fish gave the officer an immediate basis to investigate possession, even though the people who had allegedly watched it being caught were no longer available to speak directly with her.

That distinction is important because the officer did not have to rely entirely on secondhand claims. Regardless of who first removed the tarpon from the water, the protected fish was still in the couple’s possession when she arrived.

The Language Barrier Slowed the Investigation

Communication quickly became the central difficulty because neither member of the couple appeared able to understand detailed questions in English.

They initially tried to use translation features on their phones, but Winter decided that the possible criminal charge required a clearer and more reliable method.

FWC Body Cam said the officer contacted an agency-approved service and requested a Ukrainian interpreter, allowing her to explain the investigation one statement at a time and confirm that the couple understood what was being said.

Before asking who had caught the fish, Winter directed the interpreter to read the couple their Miranda rights.

The process took considerable time because each warning had to be spoken in English, translated into Ukrainian, and then clarified when the woman asked what conduct they were being held responsible for.

Winter explained through the interpreter that the tarpon was protected and that possessing it could amount to a second-degree misdemeanor.

The careful use of an interpreter was more than a courtesy. When a person is being questioned about a possible crime, especially one that could technically lead to arrest, the officer needs to be reasonably confident that the person understands both the allegation and the right not to answer questions.

The bodycam footage showed Winter working patiently through that process rather than relying on gestures, broken English, or uncertain phone translations.

One Subject Admitted Catching the Tarpon

Once the rights had been explained, Winter asked which person had caught the fish.

According to the translated response and the officer’s own summary, the man admitted that he had caught it.

Winter also confirmed that he lived in the Miami area, which became relevant when she decided how to handle the charge.

The officer explained that she could physically arrest him for the violation but instead intended to issue a notice to appear, meaning he would be released at the scene and required to return to Monroe County for court.

Through the interpreter, she made clear that the document was not an admission of guilt but a promise to appear before a judge at the listed date and time.

The man was given a September 5 court date at 9 a.m. and signed the paperwork after the interpreter explained what the signature meant.

This was a measured response to a situation that appeared to involve ignorance rather than an organized effort to conceal an illegal catch. The officer still treated the violation as serious, but she did not escalate the encounter beyond what was necessary to secure the fish, identify the responsible person, and begin the court process.

The Couple Had No Tarpon Tag or Fishing License

The investigation also revealed that the man did not have a tarpon tag and that neither person had the fishing license required for the activity they were conducting.

Winter explained that Florida residents fishing from shore may be eligible for a free shoreline license, but they must still obtain it before fishing.

Because the couple had Florida identification and appeared unfamiliar with the licensing system, the officer chose to issue a warning for that part of the encounter rather than adding another citation.

She also recommended that they use a fish-identification and regulation application that could show the rules applying to different species.

That advice addressed the larger problem exposed by the case: visitors may recognize a fish without knowing that its possession is restricted, and state fishing laws often vary by species, location, size, season, and method.

The couple’s apparent lack of knowledge did not make the tarpon legal to keep, but it did help explain how the violation may have occurred.

People who fish in unfamiliar waters have a responsibility to check the regulations before keeping anything, particularly in a place such as the Florida Keys, where many species are closely managed and some carry special protections.

Officer Winter Chose a Notice to Appear

Winter told the couple that first-time offenders often resolve similar cases through a fine or a fish-identification class, although the final decision would belong to the court.

She did not promise a specific outcome and repeatedly explained that the man would need to contact or appear before the proper Monroe County authority.

The officer then completed the paperwork while asking the couple to remain outside the vehicle unless rain made that impractical.

After the citation was signed, the protected fish was seized and photographed as evidence.

FWC Body Cam reported that it was then “returned to the resource,” meaning the state took control of the illegally possessed animal rather than leaving it with the couple.

The footage did not provide a later court outcome, so it remains unclear whether the man paid a fine, attended a class, contested the charge, or received another form of disposition.

What the video does show is that the incident moved well beyond a simple warning once the tarpon was found in the bucket and one subject acknowledged catching it.

A Routine Fishing Trip Became a Legal Matter

The encounter remained calm from beginning to end, and neither the couple nor the officer became confrontational.

The park employee described the pair as friendly, the couple cooperated with the identification process, and Winter spent much of the contact making sure they understood the law and the paperwork.

Even so, the absence of hostility did not remove the legal consequences.

Florida’s wildlife regulations are designed to protect species that are vulnerable to overharvesting or are managed under special conservation rules, and those protections apply whether a person is a longtime resident, a tourist, or someone unfamiliar with the language.

The most avoidable part of the incident was that the couple apparently began fishing without first confirming what they were allowed to keep.

A quick review of state regulations, a fishing application, or even a question to park staff could likely have prevented the entire investigation.

Instead, witnesses reported the catch, a wildlife officer was called, an interpreter had to be located, the fish was seized, and the man left with a criminal notice requiring him to return to court in another county.

FWC Body Cam presented the case as an example of how a normal evening at Bahia Honda State Park can change quickly when protected wildlife is removed from the water.

For the couple, the lesson came through a formal investigation rather than a casual explanation, and the tarpon found in the bucket became evidence in a case that could have been avoided by checking Florida’s fishing rules before casting a line.