Wisconsin Statutes
Wis. Stat. § 943.74 (2026)
Theft of farm-raised fish
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
WI-LEGdocs.legis.wisconsin.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
943.74(1)(a)(a) “Farm-raised fish” means a fish that is kept on a fish farm for propagation purposes or reared on a fish farm and that has not been introduced, stocked, or planted into waters outside a fish farm and that has not escaped from a fish farm.
943.74(1)(b)(b) “Fish farm” means a facility at which a person, including this state or a local governmental unit, hatches fish eggs or rears fish for the purpose of introduction into the waters of the state, human or animal consumption, permitting fishing, or use as bait or fertilizer or for sale to another person to rear for one of those purposes.
943.74(1)(c)(c) “Local governmental unit” means a political subdivision of this state, a special purpose district in this state, an instrumentality or corporation of the political subdivision or special purpose district, or a combination or subunit of any of the foregoing.
943.74(2)(2) No person may intentionally take and carry away, transfer, conceal, or retain possession of farm-raised fish of another without the other’s consent and with intent to deprive the owner permanently of possession of the farm-raised fish.
943.74(3)(a)(a) Except as provided in par. (b), whoever violates sub. (2) is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor.
943.74(3)(b)(b) Whoever violates sub. (2) after having been convicted of a violation of sub. (2) is guilty of a Class D felony.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2
cases, 2019–2019 · leading case: State v. Autumn Marie Love Lopez (Wis. 2019).
State v. Autumn Marie Love Lopez (Wis. 2019). “Thus, I refer to Justice Ziegler's opinion as the "majority/lead" opinion throughout this dissent because the opinion in its entirety is not joined by a majority of the court.”
State v. Autumn Marie Love Lopez (Wis. 2019). “Thus, I refer to Justice Ziegler's opinion as the "majority/lead" opinion throughout this dissent because the opinion in its entirety is not joined by a majority of the court.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.