The facts are set forth below. Please give your opinions on appropriate punishment (yes, I am the azzhat prosecutor in the case
):
Hunter draws a coveted Northern California elk archery tag. Arrows a 360 inch 6 x 6 bull, but the bull gets away. Hunter can't find the bull till days later, and the bull is dead, and the meat spoiled. So far, completely legal kill. When he finds the dead bull hunter cuts off the horns but does not apply his tag, as the law requires. At that point (once he is in possession of the animal and horns and does not tag it), under Kalifornia law, its an illegal possession. Hunter never tags the rack. Hunter leaves the rotten carcass in the field
(no law violation there----meat is rotten through no fault of his own.)
Hunter then goes hunting weeks later in another area and deliberately arrows a 5 x 4 (rag horn) for meat. Harvests the elk and processes a freezer full of elk meat. Bragging on the internet and to friend and inconsistency between the rack he claimed to tag and the one he showed friend results in an investigation and a full confession. (A friend of the hunter who saw the inconsistencies in story and obvious poaching is pissed and "outs" the poacher to law enforcement.)
Hunter is a fanatical big game archery hunter (good for him) and loves to hunt as often as he can. Hunting is his life. No prior record of poaching (or so he says---can't prove otherwise.). In Kalifornia, this poaching of the rag horn elk and failure to tag the 6 x 6 trophy) is a misdemeanor only. Penalty fine is about $1000.00 but could be as high as $10k. He prolly won't do jail (we could certainly ask for it).
Main issue is how long should his hunting privileges be suspended? What say you guys? I think 3 years. What say you? Suspension of privileges is the big hit for this guy. Also, there is restitution for the value of the elk. What's the rag horn worth? He'll be on probation for 3 years and will forfeit his $1600.00 bow (he has many other bows).
Your thoughts are appreciated. Want to be fair, but appropriately punitive. IMHO, poaching is rampant and tough to detect. Don't want to over or under punish.
Your honest thoughts are appreciated.
Jordan
No hunting 3 years, no bow hunting for elk for life.
No hunting for three. Then he can hunt any way, legally. $2000 for the raghorn.
I'll give $400 for his bow and arrows.
Given these particular circumstances, 300LH probably has it about right. If it were out and out unlicensed purposeful poaching, it should be a hefty fine and zero hunting permitted in the future.
I'll give $400 for his bow and arrows.
Sorry, but no can do.
Three years suspension of hunting privileges is good. Forfeiture of bow is also good. Throw in some community service in the conservation area. He's going to have some time on his hands, he might as well put it to good use. Who knows he might learn something from this experience.
No excuse for that. A 5 minute phone call to an enforcement officer when he found his "lost" elk would have put him in a better place. Instead you have two dead elk and a guy bragging about his hunting prowess.
What would you (the prosecution) have done if he had cleanly taken a first elk and put it in his freezer and then went out and took another? I consider this the same situation.
I vote for 3 years suspension, seize and donate the meat, take his bow, the antlers, max state fines for each animal taken, and potentially his truck if he used it to haul out the 2nd elk.
Harsh absolutely, but he knew what did was ethically wrong and probably illegal from the time he didn't tag the fist set of antlers.
No excuse for that. A 5 minute phone call to an enforcement officer when he found his "lost" elk would have put him in a better place. Instead you have two dead elk and a guy bragging about his hunting prowess.
What would you (the prosecution) have done if he had cleanly taken a first elk and put it in his freezer and then went out and took another? I consider this the same situation.
I vote for 3 years suspension, seize and donate the meat, take his bow, the antlers, max state fines for each animal taken, and potentially his truck if he used it to haul out the 2nd elk.
Harsh absolutely, but he knew what did was ethically wrong and probably illegal from the time he didn't tag the fist set of antlers.
^^^^ This ^^^
10 years suspension. $5000 fine.
I've often wondered if the fine should match the person's earnings. For example, if this guy makes $250K a year then $5K is nothing but for a person making minimum wage they may never be able to pay it off.
No excuse for that. A 5 minute phone call to an enforcement officer when he found his "lost" elk would have put him in a better place. Instead you have two dead elk and a guy bragging about his hunting prowess.
What would you (the prosecution) have done if he had cleanly taken a first elk and put it in his freezer and then went out and took another? I consider this the same situation.
I vote for 3 years suspension, seize and donate the meat, take his bow, the antlers, max state fines for each animal taken, and potentially his truck if he used it to haul out the 2nd elk.
Harsh absolutely, but he knew what did was ethically wrong and probably illegal from the time he didn't tag the fist set of antlers.
^^^^ This ^^^
I would go this route as well and throw in 250 hours of community service as well. I might threaten him with the truck but I wouldn't take, save that for the "professional poachers".
As for being the azzhatt prosecutor, someone has to do it, just make sure you do it with a conscience.
No excuse for that. A 5 minute phone call to an enforcement officer when he found his "lost" elk would have put him in a better place. Instead you have two dead elk and a guy bragging about his hunting prowess.
What would you (the prosecution) have done if he had cleanly taken a first elk and put it in his freezer and then went out and took another? I consider this the same situation.
I vote for 3 years suspension, seize and donate the meat, take his bow, the antlers, max state fines for each animal taken, and potentially his truck if he used it to haul out the 2nd elk.
Harsh absolutely, but he knew what did was ethically wrong and probably illegal from the time he didn't tag the fist set of antlers.
^^^^ This ^^^
I would go this route as well and throw in 250 hours of community service as well. I might threaten him with the truck but I wouldn't take, save that for the "professional poachers".
As for being the azzhatt prosecutor, someone has to do it, just make sure you do it with a conscience.
The addition of community service in lieu of the truck seizure is a good compromise. There are definitely worse offenders out there...
No excuse for that. A 5 minute phone call to an enforcement officer when he found his "lost" elk would have put him in a better place. Instead you have two dead elk and a guy bragging about his hunting prowess.
What would you (the prosecution) have done if he had cleanly taken a first elk and put it in his freezer and then went out and took another? I consider this the same situation.
I vote for 3 years suspension, seize and donate the meat, take his bow, the antlers, max state fines for each animal taken, and potentially his truck if he used it to haul out the 2nd elk.
Harsh absolutely, but he knew what did was ethically wrong and probably illegal from the time he didn't tag the fist set of antlers.
^^^^ This ^^^
I would go this route as well and throw in 250 hours of community service as well. I might threaten him with the truck but I wouldn't take, save that for the "professional poachers".
As for being the azzhatt prosecutor, someone has to do it, just make sure you do it with a conscience.
This
well, in the old days, poaching the King's deer was punishable by death.
I hate poachers worse than you can imagine, but what would have happened if someone else had stumbled across the first dead elk. Could he/she have taken the antlers? Would they need a tag? Can you pick up sheds without a tag? The meat is wasted, but does the set of antlers also have to be wasted?
The man made an effort to recover the bull but failed. If he did not break the law of wanton waste by not recovering and using the meat and was legally able to shoot another bull, would not the same thing also apply to the antlers? If people wandering out in the woods can pick up antlers or other body parts with out having a tag, why does he need to tag a set of antlers from a rotten bull?
To me, this is the key to the whole situation. Do all antlers recovered from the field, even from animals you did not kill but found dead and rotten, need to be tagged?
Perhaps I am not seeing the whole picture, but I don't see why the person needed to tag the first set of antlers if a different person could recover the set from a rotten carcase without a tag unless the law requires that all antlers, from whatever source, have a tag.
give him a warning and ask him to make a $1000 dollar charitable contribution and provide a receipt. No loss of privileges .
I hate poachers worse than you can imagine, but what would have happened if someone else had stumbled across the first dead elk. Could he/she have taken the antlers? Would they need a tag? Can you pick up sheds without a tag? The meat is wasted, but does the set of antlers also have to be wasted?
The man made an effort to recover the bull but failed. If he did not break the law of wanton waste by not recovering and using the meat and was legally able to shoot another bull, would not the same thing also apply to the antlers? If people wandering out in the woods can pick up antlers or other body parts with out having a tag, why does he need to tag a set of antlers from a rotten bull?
To me, this is the key to the whole situation. Do all antlers recovered from the field, even from animals you did not kill but found dead and rotten, need to be tagged?
Perhaps I am not seeing the whole picture, but I don't see why the person needed to tag the first set of antlers if a different person could recover the set from a rotten carcase without a tag unless the law requires that all antlers, from whatever source, have a tag.
Hence the need for a 5 minute phone call to fish and game. Best I could decipher is that one could take those antlers from that animal legally without a tag in the state of California but the suspect person in this case is the one that killed the elk in the first place. That complicates things enough to warrant a phone call IMO.
Whatever the Cal Fish and Game determine. I would expect they have set criteria for such shenanigans and I have not known any F&G department to go light on a criminal.
What are the odds, a bow hunter that can't find his kill.
Met lots that have the attitude of 'I expect to lose some'
... person in this case is the one that killed the elk in the first place. That complicates things enough to warrant a phone call IMO.
I certainly agree that a phone call to the G&F would have been wise. If the OP is correct about the law, they would have told him to leave the antlers in the woods or tag them.
I still wonder whether a different person finding the rotten elk could take the antlers without a tag. The OP seems to suggest that they could not. What about sheds?
And if I personally shot/hit a buck and found it dead a few days later that would be the end of the season. Tag the horns and be done.
Same goes if I was hunting horns and accidentally shot a dink. Tag the dink and be done(obviously).
Hunter in question appears to think it's okay to shoot/kill 2 elk with 1 tag. Sounds like a spoiled bitch.
And if I personally shot/hit a buck and found it dead a few days later that would be the end of the season. Tag the horns and be done.
I have done this with deer. The elk outfitter I use has a kill or wound policy. Cutting fur on an animal fills your tag whether you recover it or not. That may not be the laws of the state, but it is his policy.
He killed the first one legally, no problem
He poached the second. I'm sure the state has set penalties for poaching.
Go with that.
He killed the first one legally, no problem
He poached the second. I'm sure the state has set penalties for poaching.
Go with that.
Correct. First kill was legal---then became illegal possession on failure to tag. Second kill was poach.
I appreciate your in put guys. Feel free to keep it coming. Statute specifies minimums and maximums. That is why I am asking for advise, because there is a wide range of punishment options. I want to be "firm but fair".
Jordan
How old was the second elk? That age might be an appropriate time of punishment (can't hunt again until full "replacement" of the poached elk has occurred). $5k, loss of bow, are a given.
What are the minimums specified by statute...?
I'd go light on the illegal possession and a life time ban on ever drawing another Elk tag in that state.
A few hundred to pay for the Elk and the investigation.
He killed the first one legally, no problem
He poached the second. I'm sure the state has set penalties for poaching.
Go with that.
Correct. First kill was legal---then became illegal possession on failure to tag. Second kill was poach.
I appreciate your in put guys. Feel free to keep it coming. Statute specifies minimums and maximums. That is why I am asking for advise, because there is a wide range of punishment options. I want to be "firm but fair".
Jordan
If the described events are accurate, it appears that the hunter had the 'intent' to illegally possess the first and to poach the second. Go with the fair maximums.
He killed the first one legally,
Wrong-O...... He violated the wanton waste law, too.
At least in Colorado. The carcass tag must be immediately detached upon kill, invalidating the license for use on a 'second one'. It is a 'carcass' tag. Cannot be attached to horns, unless the horns are still attached to the carcass....
He could have 'skirted' the whole thing here(CO) with picture proof of the rotted elk and recovery of the horns from a 'found' kill. Still ain't right, but woulda kept him outta trouble......
When the state of California starts getting tough on crimes against humans then I'd get tough on this guy, till then I think he should be let off with a slap on the wrist like the rest of the robbers, rapist and thugs are . . . . . . . . jmo . . . . . . . .before you start flaming me, I am not condoning his behavior
No excuse for that. A 5 minute phone call to an enforcement officer when he found his "lost" elk would have put him in a better place. Instead you have two dead elk and a guy bragging about his hunting prowess.
What would you (the prosecution) have done if he had cleanly taken a first elk and put it in his freezer and then went out and took another? I consider this the same situation.
I vote for 3 years suspension, seize and donate the meat, take his bow, the antlers, max state fines for each animal taken, and potentially his truck if he used it to haul out the 2nd elk.
Harsh absolutely, but he knew what did was ethically wrong and probably illegal from the time he didn't tag the fist set of antlers.
^^^^ This ^^^
I would go this route as well and throw in 250 hours of community service as well. I might threaten him with the truck but I wouldn't take, save that for the "professional poachers".
As for being the azzhatt prosecutor, someone has to do it, just make sure you do it with a conscience.
Well said on all counts there Paul; +1.
He lost a game animal. It happens. He kept hunting, who wouldn't? Then he found the first one. Punch your tag, you're done hunting. You made a bad hit or did a bad job tracking, either way, you filled your tag. Take the horns, make the phone call, you're done.
Don't know about legality, but that seems logical.
Second bull was poached, guy is a bragger, "game hog", a little too self important to think about the game he's killing. Give him a healthy dose, and I mean a stiff dose, of humility. Doesn't sound like money will hurt him, take his hunting rights.
When I am sentencing someone on a first offense poaching, I typically impose, along with other sanctions, a three year suspension of hunting privileges. Second offense nets them maximum suspension allowed. Al
He lost a game animal. It happens. He kept hunting, who wouldn't?
It appears he kept hunting AFTER he found the first one. Who wouldn't? Well, a whole bunch here wouldn't.....
I'd say that if the evidence points to him willfully violating the law, then make it as painful for him as you can. One reason poaching is so prevalent is that the consequences are often not a deterrent. I guess that goes with just about every crime these days. Slaps on the wrist for poachers is a complete insult to those of us who strive to obey the laws.
He lost a game animal. It happens. He kept hunting, who wouldn't?
It appears he kept hunting AFTER he found the first one. Who wouldn't? Well, a whole bunch here wouldn't.....
Correct. After he found the first elk (the trophy---the legal kill but with spoiled meat) he went out hunting again a few days/weeks later and bagged the second elk, the raghorn. The second kill was a straight up poach.
I appreciate all the perspective and opinions you guys are giving me. Good stuff. Thanks.
He lost a game animal. It happens. He kept hunting, who wouldn't?
It appears he kept hunting AFTER he found the first one. Who wouldn't? Well, a whole bunch here wouldn't.....
Yep, agreed. Second elk was poaching. But the time in between the shooting of the first and finding the first, it would not be unreasonable for him to keep hunting.
I'm glad he went back for the first and kept looking. But I suspect his ego had something to do with the search.
I used to help the Game Wardens in Texas. For every tip that led to a Game Warden's successful apprehension of a poacher the Game Warden would give the Peace Officer who helped him a Texas Parks & Wildlife cap. We (Peace Officers) all did if there was PC to either stop the alleged offender's truck, or stop the alleged offender. Poachers are still universally despised by all of the Peace Officers in the area I worked. I have seen a truck and all the guns (the alleged offender was the only person in the truck) in it seized by the state. On to my recommendation:
1) 3 year complete ban on hunting,
2) Seizure of his truck (if it was used to transport the illegal Elk) and his bow,
3) $10,000.00 fine and seizure of any illegal parts of either Elk.
Three years suspension of hunting privileges and a fine of $5k. Confiscate the bow, not the truck.
Any future violations, lifetime ban.
I am a criminal defense attorney with 18 years' experience. Fish & game cases are often difficult to resolve. Here in Washington we have a broad range of acts and omissions that qualify as criminal conduct.
For me, it's most effective to put each case into one of two categories:
1. People who broke the law unknowingly or mistakenly. These are the guys who, forgot their license and tag in yesterday's jacket and discover their mistake when checked by the warden. They're the guys who wander into a different game unit--that's closed. The guys who are hunting with a borrowed rifle that's smaller than the minimum caliber allowed by law. The guy who notches his tag incorrectly--in a manner that DOES NOT put him at any sort of advantage. The guy who gives meat to a friend or relative without providing a note with all umpteen required items of information.
Sure, they broke the law. It's their fault. It's their responsibility. They should have checked the game regs closer. They will be held accountable by the court in some fashion. But, to a man, they didn't actually know they were breaking the law until they were told or they discovered where they went wrong. if their story checks out, these are the guys who don't need to get completely whacked, especially if no animal was killed unlawfully.
2. Guys who walk away from the truck, knowing they are breaking the law. These are the guys who get caught carrying their wife's tag in addition to their own. They're carrying a bow tag and a rifle during rifle season. They parked their truck next to a locked gate that is posted with "No Trespassing" signs and head on in anyway. They shoot from their truck, while on a public road.
These guys just don't care. They are only sorry that they got caught--nothing more. These guys are hard to effectively punish because they only care about their hunting rights. They will gladly go to jail for awhile, pay a fine, be on probation after release, whatever. They just want to be able to hunt again next year. I say it's hard to "effectively" punish them, because non-hunter prosecutors think they are really whacking a guy when he agrees to a jail term and a large fine. Nope. They are giving him exactly what he wants.
So, Rob, what should you do? I'd say you have a classic Category #2 on your hands. Do everything you can to get the guy's hunting privileges for as long as possible. It's what matters most to him. In my experience, poachers rarely get caught their first time. I'd bet that this guy has "bent the rules" a time or two before. I'd further guess that he's failed to tag previously so that he could harvest more than one animal. Even if I'm wrong, he intentionally broke the law here, killing a second animal when most people didn't even get one animal.
Put him in hunting time-out as long as you can.
Ted Nuggent hunting in CA again?
Fine him 10.00 or 10 days in jail sent him to tracking school and tell him not to do it again.
I can't say what he would or should get in Cali, but in MT it would go like this:
The first elk is unlawful to possess, you may only pickup antlers from dead elk that have died naturally. Before any one says that there is no way to prove it... well he confessed.
Count I: unlawful possession of a trophy elk.
Elk was unlawfully in his possession and he bragged about it. If actual trophy it would be a felony here. Mandatory 36 months loss of privileges and $8000 statutory restitution. Fines of up to $50,000 and prison up to 5 years. Would probably pay $2500 to $5000 depending on financial status and be put on probation for 5 years.
Count II: overlimit- fine of $300-$1000 and loss of privileges for 24 months. Restitution of $1000.
He should loose both antler racks and the meat.
If his biggest concern was his hunting privileges then I would agree to only recommend the minimum 3 years but he would pay a a respectable fine, full restitution and be on probation for the full 5 years.
Should he probably get more, yes. Will defense counsel argue for less and cry that defendant is a poor misunderstood choir boy that just had a momentary lapse of judgment, Yes. Is the penalty enough to alter behavior?
Mandatory 36 months loss of privileges and $8000 statutory restitution. Fines of up to $50,000 and prison up to 5 years. Would probably pay $2500 to $5000 depending on financial status and be put on probation for 5 years.
Wonder why financial status matters?
Wonder why financial status matters?
Because to some a $5000 fine is pocket change, while to others it's 25% of their yearly income
Wonder why financial status matters?
Because to some a $5000 fine is pocket change, while to others it's 25% of their yearly income
So, what your saying is, the punishment boils down to revenue.
I live in a small county, and law enforcement here from the SO and local PD is not aggressive, they mostly write reports and hap hazardly f*ck with dope dealers that don't pay the right people, it's got more to do with politics and getting re-elected than any thing. The game wardens are another story, those guys are relentless in their pursuit of ANYTHING that may even be partially construed as illegal. They will prosecute you to the fullest extent of the law for hunting 99 yards from corn (100 is legal), I wonder why that is?
So we are now voting on the internet as to what appropriate punishments should be?
Gut it....take the carcaus to a freezer locker and make him crawl up inside and sleep there every night for a week....posting a guard to make certain of total compliance!
He knew he was doing wrong from the get-go. "fanatical hunter" say's a lot. I'll bet he has done things like this before, just has not been caught till now.
Throw the book at him!
No excuse for that. A 5 minute phone call to an enforcement officer when he found his "lost" elk would have put him in a better place. Instead you have two dead elk and a guy bragging about his hunting prowess.
What would you (the prosecution) have done if he had cleanly taken a first elk and put it in his freezer and then went out and took another? I consider this the same situation.
I vote for 3 years suspension, seize and donate the meat, take his bow, the antlers, max state fines for each animal taken, and potentially his truck if he used it to haul out the 2nd elk.
Harsh absolutely, but he knew what did was ethically wrong and probably illegal from the time he didn't tag the fist set of antlers.
This, IMHO.
I'd go 5 years on suspension. Start at 1k in fines then add in market value of animal. IE: 300#'s of meat at $6 per= $1800+ $1000= $2800 in total fines.
To me, the license suspension is primary.
I don't like the idea of confiscation of equipment.
Ok I live in California and I know how hard it is to draw one of these tags or any special tag.
I'd be willing to bet 100-to-1 this is NOT this Azzhat's first rodeo! (Did F&G think to look for a large stash of Deer antlers?) Probably to late to do so now.
Look at his circumstances, ie income-does his wife work-mouths to feed & clothe at home, you don't want to punish any kids for his transgressions.
Impose:
Maximum fine.
Jail time in the form of 26 weekends- cleaning up roadsides or graffiti.
Confiscation of actual bow & gear used- I'll bet there's pictures.
TOTAL LIFETIME BAN FROM ANY SPECIAL HUNTS&TAGS.
Minimum 5 year hunting ban, 10 or more preferred, with lifetime ban guarantee for any F&G violation down the road.
I don't know if California is part of the western F&G alliance where a hunting ban in one state results in same in the others. If so, it should be applied.
Wonder why financial status matters?
Because to some a $5000 fine is pocket change, while to others it's 25% of their yearly income
So, what your saying is, the punishment boils down to revenue.
I live in a small county, and law enforcement here from the SO and local PD is not aggressive, they mostly write reports and hap hazardly f*ck with dope dealers that don't pay the right people, it's got more to do with politics and getting re-elected than any thing. The game wardens are another story, those guys are relentless in their pursuit of ANYTHING that may even be partially construed as illegal. They will prosecute you to the fullest extent of the law for hunting 99 yards from corn (100 is legal), I wonder why that is?
First, most states prohibit enforcement of fines against indigent defendants.
Second, the purpose of imposing a fine is to change behavior. The government has only a few tools to make someone change behavior. Some people respond to different tools. Jail, fines, community service, treatment programs, maybe a couple other lesser used tools. Jails are expensive and overcrowded and reserved for people that won't change. It costs tax dollars to house a person that may care little about going to jail. For most people a fine is embarrassing and penalizing enough to change their behavior. If not, then second offenses warrant a different tool.
You can have an ax against game wardens but the defendant in this case made a conscious decision to kill two elk in a special district. Hardly a 99 yards from corn infraction.
What are the odds, a bow hunter that can't find his kill.
Met lots that have the attitude of 'I expect to lose some'
Fairly low around here. About the same as what I hear from non bowhunters with "modern" weapons.
One thing I forgot to add, confiscate the 'Ivory' too! Leave him NO momentoes.
Intentional acts, so about $5K, no trophies, and no hunting for 5 years including reciprocity across all of the US.
While people who plead guilty to attempted murder are getting 6 monthes probation.
While people who plead guilty to attempted murder are getting 6 monthes probation.
Yep . . . . . . . that's two things in the last 6 months . . . .lol
Somehow the prosecutor soliciting opinions in this manor doesn't quite feel right. Does the defendant know that you're using this as part of figuring out his penalty?
But, heavy fines, loss of license for 5 years, mandatory class, and some form of wildlife public service seem in order. Seems like the wildlife service stuff might be something he could do for the 5 years that he doesn't have a license.
No excuse for that. A 5 minute phone call to an enforcement officer when he found his "lost" elk would have put him in a better place. Instead you have two dead elk and a guy bragging about his hunting prowess.
What would you (the prosecution) have done if he had cleanly taken a first elk and put it in his freezer and then went out and took another? I consider this the same situation.
I vote for 3 years suspension, seize and donate the meat, take his bow, the antlers, max state fines for each animal taken, and potentially his truck if he used it to haul out the 2nd elk.
Harsh absolutely, but he knew what did was ethically wrong and probably illegal from the time he didn't tag the fist set of antlers.
I also agree with this. Those tags are nearly impossible to draw, and he got very greedy. I'm sure he was convinced he got cheated somehow when he didn't find the first elk and rationalized killing a second.
It doesn't work that way.
While people who plead guilty to attempted murder are getting 6 monthes probation.
That's a crime in of itself, IMO. No wonder LEO get frustrated.
Somehow the prosecutor soliciting opinions in this manor doesn't quite feel right. Does the defendant know that you're using this as part of figuring out his penalty?
Exactly my point earlier. Half of the posters here have him pegged as a chronic poacher even though that has not been proven nor has he even been charged in the past.
This entire thread doesn't sit right with me.
Originally Posted By: Levers
Somehow the prosecutor soliciting opinions in this manor doesn't quite feel right. Does the defendant know that you're using this as part of figuring out his penalty?
The Prosecutor doesn't DECIDE the penalty.
They can make suggestions, but the JUDGE will make all the decisions on sentencing
I do agree it's pretty tacky to be asking here though
I'd be good with no hunting 5 yrs. Some probation. A lot of public service to include helping wildlife and teaching hunter saftety and gun saftey in schools or such( probably won't happen in KA).
Add in some monetary issues, confiscate the bow for sure, threaten the vehicle. I"m not sure what amount, but at least the value of the animals as both were illegal at that point. And likely the value of the tag for 5 years you can't hunt tossed in.
RE asking, I don't see an issue, simply because he is asking the "hunters" peers how pissed they are and what they would consider fair for stealing from them. He isn't asking a pimp waht the penalty for a prostitute would be or similar situations.
Originally Posted By: Levers
Somehow the prosecutor soliciting opinions in this manor doesn't quite feel right. Does the defendant know that you're using this as part of figuring out his penalty?
The Prosecutor doesn't DECIDE the penalty.
They can make suggestions, but the JUDGE will make all the decisions on sentencing
I do agree it's pretty tacky to be asking here though
I value the opinions of other hunters on this issue, since they are directly affected by it. I've solicited opinions from other hunters/sportsmen in person and then here. This is solely for the purpose of helping me form my own opinion on community standard (the hunting community) in terms of what I should be asking the court for by way of sanctions. The offender's identity is unknown to anyone here---unless someone happens to know the facts of this case (which I doubt).
Jordan
When someone finds a dead elk is it legal to remove the antlers? Or does the fact that he was hunting and arrowed the elk which escaped use his tag?
Originally Posted By: Levers
Somehow the prosecutor soliciting opinions in this manor doesn't quite feel right. Does the defendant know that you're using this as part of figuring out his penalty?
The Prosecutor doesn't DECIDE the penalty.
They can make suggestions, but the JUDGE will make all the decisions on sentencing
I do agree it's pretty tacky to be asking here though
I value the opinions of other hunters on this issue, since they are directly affected by it. I've solicited opinions from other hunters/sportsmen in person and then here. This is solely for the purpose of helping me form my own opinion on community standard (the hunting community) in terms of what I should be asking the court for by way of sanctions. The offender's identity is unknown to anyone here---unless someone happens to know the facts of this case (which I doubt).
Jordan
Looks like people were pretty much in agreement as to the "just" punishment. Where do all you offendees think plea agreements and even recommendations come from?
Even viewing Itppowell's nonsequitur people have a pretty cogent sense of justice.
Depending on what part of CA he shot the two elk in the local farming community should help pay his fines since he did them a service.
Calling CA Fish and Game is a foolish idea, they are lunatics.
I'm thinking $500 fine for failure to tag elk #1, $2500 for the poaching of elk #2, plus loss of bow. Lifetime loss of hunting privileges in the western states, suspended after 3 years on two conditions: 1) conducting 300 hours of training youth in hunting ethics and safety and 2) no subsequent violation of game laws.
Thanks guys for all the opinions and input. It has helped me refine my own position (which I will keep to myself
). It will be up to the judge to impose what he deems to be a just sentence. Your input has helped me refine what I should be asking the court for.
Again, thanks all.
Jordan
1. Loss of all State hunting privileges (both big game and small game) for 3 years.
2. Antlers forfeited.
3. $1,000 fine.
4. He keeps his bow, arrows and truck.
5. A notation on his State hunting record reading that if he commits one more violation of ANY of the State hunting laws, it will result in his loss of all State hunting privileges for LIFE !!!
This last (#5) ruling is extremely important. Obviously, this guy KNEW he was violating the game laws by shooting the 2nd. elk. He needs to realize he doesn't have any "special privilege" to hunt when, what and how he wishes. Thus the "one more violation" clause's purpose is to put some "teeth" into any further game law violations by this person who apparently believes he doesn't have to abide by the same game laws other hunters must obey.
By illegally shooting the 2nd. elk, he was eliminating another hunter's opportunity to take some fine, tasty meat home that year and, a few years later, he's eliminated another hunter's opportunity to take a nice elk with good antlers and meat.
I.E., he's a "game-hog", the worst kind of thoughtless hunter who beiieves he's above-the-law and that the game laws do not apply to him, but they apply ONLY to other hunters.
Strength & Honor...
Ron T.
Rob,
If it's not to late for feedback:
I'd like to see something pretty stiff. The odds of getting an elk tag here are very low, and this yoyo just took out two of CA's. Literally a lifetime's worth.
So, no more CA elk tags, ever.
5 years, no CA hunting license.
$10,000 fine + plus bow.
Forfeit meat and both sets of antlers.
This is going to seem a bit steep for some folks in the Rocky Mountain states, but take a look at the differences in tag availability between CA vs MT,WY,CO and ID. 'bout an order of magnitude if not more.
Look at what folks are getting fined with regards to being over the possession limit with abalone in Sonoma and Mendo. Even not going over daily limit, an extra ab in possession can cost your license and $1000-$1500. The black market value of an abalone is $100. A typical fine for a first time offender multiplies that value by 10-15x. What is the value of the second bull? Certainly not less than $1000
Scott
Taking his truck would be no less than legalized theft.
Government confiscation is already completely out of control.
Wonder why financial status matters?
Because to some a $5000 fine is pocket change, while to others it's 25% of their yearly income
So, what your saying is, the punishment boils down to revenue.
I live in a small county, and law enforcement here from the SO and local PD is not aggressive, they mostly write reports and hap hazardly f*ck with dope dealers that don't pay the right people, it's got more to do with politics and getting re-elected than any thing.
The game wardens are another story, those guys are relentless in their pursuit of ANYTHING that may even be partially construed as illegal. They will prosecute you to the fullest extent of the law for hunting 99 yards from corn (100 is legal), I wonder why that is? Of all the peace officer jobs in any state, the Game Wardens are considered the most prestigious followed by the Highway Patrol. Once they graduate the acdemy and are given a duty station they enjoy almost complete anonymity. They perform above and beyond what is expected because the ones chosen to become Game Wardens are the cream of the crop and every single one of them is a Type "A" personality - the best possible
Law Enforcement Officers available from a very large pool of hopeful wannabe Game Wardens vying for a few spots in the next academy.
Yep, and a big old load of horseschit that was . . . . . .he must have never met one around here. [bleep] joke
No excuse for that. A 5 minute phone call to an enforcement officer when he found his "lost" elk would have put him in a better place. Instead you have two dead elk and a guy bragging about his hunting prowess.
What would you (the prosecution) have done if he had cleanly taken a first elk and put it in his freezer and then went out and took another? I consider this the same situation.
I vote for 3 years suspension, seize and donate the meat, take his bow, the antlers, max state fines for each animal taken, and potentially his truck if he used it to haul out the 2nd elk.
Harsh absolutely, but he knew what did was ethically wrong and probably illegal from the time he didn't tag the fist set of antlers.
^^^^ This ^^^
I would go this route as well and throw in 250 hours of community service as well. I might threaten him with the truck but I wouldn't take, save that for the "professional poachers".
As for being the azzhatt prosecutor, someone has to do it, just make sure you do it with a conscience.
I would put his truck into the deal in case he doesn't do the community service. And I'd make it 500 hours. He looses the antlers, any associated pictures, nothing to brag about. All meat, Bow, etc it needs to cost him something financially, based on income. Sounds like he's got $'s. In addition to loosing his rights to hunt for 3-5 years additional probation for additional 5 years then he looses the truck. These guys have got to get the message.
This thread stinks to high heaven.
Different rules in different states, but I'm pretty sure he didn't do anything illegal if it were in Idaho. He did NOT waste an animal (searched diligently).
The second animal was shot legally, and recovered.
So, the only violation (apparently) is the illegal removal of antlers from a spoiled carcass. Which at least in Idaho is perfectly legal as far as I know. Hardly a capital offense.
The accused is a braggart, and infected with a bad case of morals, which I find unpalatable.
The acts, however, are much closer to the 99 yards from corn variety than wanton destruction.
I think any prosecutor that falls for the fish-cop hyperbole is going to find himself looking very silly in front of a judge if a good defense attorney is involved.
I don't like a poacher but Jesus Christ some of you guys amaze me. Taking the guy's truck? Why not take his wife's Mercedes too? How do you even know what or if he was driving? Maybe he hiked from.his friggin house, maybe you should take his house too? Take the guy's hunting rights and get over it.
This thread stinks to high heaven.
Different rules in different states, but I'm pretty sure he didn't do anything illegal if it were in Idaho. He did NOT waste an animal (searched diligently).
The second animal was shot legally, and recovered.
So, the only violation (apparently) is the illegal removal of antlers from a spoiled carcass. Which at least in Idaho is perfectly legal as far as I know. Hardly a capital offense.
The accused is a braggart, and infected with a bad case of morals, which I find unpalatable.
The acts, however, are much closer to the 99 yards from corn variety than wanton destruction.
I think any prosecutor that falls for the fish-cop hyperbole is going to find himself looking very silly in front of a judge if a good defense attorney is involved.
Dutch, correction: the second animal was a poach. He'd already killed a trophy and found it and harvested the antlers off the rotten meat. Then he went out hunting again and shot the second animal (the rag horn) an animal for which he did not have a tag.
Reguarding the 'taking a set of antlers off a dead animal', I don't know California law and am not going to try to figure it out. Here the law states if you find a shed antler not attached to a skull plate, take it. If the antler is attached to a skull plate you have to notify Fish & Game. At that point they'll either want to come look at it at the site, or direct you to bring it out with you. They'll give you a 'carcass' tag to legally possess the antlers attached to the skull plate.
Edit to add, by tagging a skull plated antler, it prevents all these hillbillies around here from shooting a trophy, stashing it in the woods to rot, and coming back in the spring to pick up the cleaned up skull.
This thread stinks to high heaven.
Different rules in different states, but I'm pretty sure he didn't do anything illegal if it were in Idaho. He did NOT waste an animal (searched diligently).
The second animal was shot legally, and recovered.
So, the only violation (apparently) is the illegal removal of antlers from a spoiled carcass. Which at least in Idaho is perfectly legal as far as I know. Hardly a capital offense.
The accused is a braggart, and infected with a bad case of morals, which I find unpalatable.
The acts, however, are much closer to the 99 yards from corn variety than wanton destruction.
I think any prosecutor that falls for the fish-cop hyperbole is going to find himself looking very silly in front of a judge if a good defense attorney is involved.
Dutch, correction: the second animal was a poach. He'd already killed a trophy and found it and harvested the antlers off the rotten meat. Then he went out hunting again and shot the second animal (the rag horn) an animal for which he did not have a tag.
+1 ^^^
If he had a doubt he should have contacted F&G but he didn't because he knew good and well what he was doing was wrong.
As stated above, "CA Elk tags are few and far between".
Three years loss of hunting Lic..
No Elk tag forever.
Stiff fine.
And ALLOT of community service.
1. Loss of all State hunting privileges (both big game and small game) for 3 years.
2. Antlers forfeited.
3. $1,000 fine.
4. He keeps his bow, arrows and truck.
5. A notation on his State hunting record reading that if he commits one more violation of ANY of the State hunting laws, it will result in his loss of all State hunting privileges for LIFE !!!
This last (#5) ruling is extremely important. Obviously, this guy KNEW he was violating the game laws by shooting the 2nd. elk. He needs to realize he doesn't have any "special privilege" to hunt when, what and how he wishes. Thus the "one more violation" clause's purpose is to put some "teeth" into any further game law violations by this person who apparently believes he doesn't have to abide by the same game laws other hunters must obey.
By illegally shooting the 2nd. elk, he was eliminating another hunter's opportunity to take some fine, tasty meat home that year and, a few years later, he's eliminated another hunter's opportunity to take a nice elk with good antlers and meat.
I.E., he's a "game-hog", the worst kind of thoughtless hunter who beiieves he's above-the-law and that the game laws do not apply to him, but they apply ONLY to other hunters.
Strength & Honor...
Ron T.
this only to add he can never hunt elk in CA again. which could transfer to other states I believe. I know other states acknowledge a ban on hunting privileges, not sure if species specific would transfer to other states as well.
FARMINGTON � A Wilton man has been sentenced to one year in prison for sexually assaulting two young girls.
Peter Essman was also sentenced last week to four years of probation and ordered to register as a sex offender for 10 years.
The 65-year-old Essman pleaded guilty earlier this month to one felony count of unlawful sexual contact and one misdemeanor charge of unlawful sexual touching. The state dismissed two identical charges in a plea agreement.
Prosecutors say Essman touched the victims unlawfully under the guise of giving them back rubs between Feb. 2, 2011, and Feb. 1, 2012.
Essman�s attorney tells the Sun Journal that his client is remorseful.
Game laws shouldn't be pushed to the point of be ridiculous in fines and lost of licence . If a person is going to poach, a license means nothing anyway. All the game is to the state , a money maker and nothing else just like traffic ticketing is about safety, bullchit . Small fine maybe and a year without being able to purchase a license should be all he should get. State taking a person personal property is a injustice by itself and should be illegal.
This thread stinks to high heaven.
Different rules in different states, but I'm pretty sure he didn't do anything illegal if it were in Idaho. He did NOT waste an animal (searched diligently).
The second animal was shot legally, and recovered.
So, the only violation (apparently) is the illegal removal of antlers from a spoiled carcass. Which at least in Idaho is perfectly legal as far as I know. Hardly a capital offense.
The accused is a braggart, and infected with a bad case of morals, which I find unpalatable.
The acts, however, are much closer to the 99 yards from corn variety than wanton destruction.
I think any prosecutor that falls for the fish-cop hyperbole is going to find himself looking very silly in front of a judge if a good defense attorney is involved.
It would be unlawful in Idaho too.
https://fishandgame.idaho.gov/content/question/can-i-take-horns-dead-animal-i-foundPossession and Sale of Wildlife Found Dead:
Protected species of wildlife that have died of natural causes are generally considered property of the state and may not be possessed.
But parts of big game species � hides, horns, bones, antlers, elk teeth, bear, lion and wolf parts � may be recovered and possessed for personal use if the animal died of natural causes. Lawfully recovered and possessed parts � except horns from bighorn sheep � may be sold, transferred, purchased or bartered, when accompanied by a statement on how it was obtained.
Edible meat from game animals taken from the wild may not be purchased, bartered or sold.
Recovery, Possession and Sale of Bighorn Sheep Horns:
Horns from bighorn sheep that have died of natural causes may be recovered and possessed. All bighorn sheep horns must be presented to Fish and Game for marking with a permanent pin within 30 days of recovery. It is unlawful to sell, barter or purchase bighorn sheep horns obtained under these circumstances, or to transfer ownership of recovered bighorn sheep horns without a permit from Idaho Fish and Game.
Before someone claims an arrow is a natural cause.
"Is an elk that has been wounded by an arrow and dies later considered to have "died from natural causes"?
I found a dead bull elk that was wounded in archery season and was never recovered. Can I keep the horns? There is no is no definition of what natural death is in the regs, and only parts of natural deaths can be salvaged.
Answer
An arrow wound is not natural. This animal would not have died if not hit by the arrow. No parts of this animal can be legally salvaged."
So, what your saying is, the punishment boils down to revenue.
No.
What I'm saying is a fine that is "punishing" to some is an average weekend's costs to others, and if it's to have any real effect, it should be proportionate
Dutch, correction: the second animal was a poach. He'd already killed a trophy and found it and harvested the antlers off the rotten meat. Then he went out hunting again and shot the second animal (the rag horn) an animal for which he did not have a tag.
They were both "poached" in the sense that neither was legal given his actions
The first was illegal due to not tagging, and the second due to the fact he knowingly killed over his limit by using a tag that should have gone on the antlers.
I'd be good with no hunting 5 yrs. Some probation. A lot of public service to include helping wildlife and teaching hunter saftety and gun saftey in schools or such( probably won't happen in KA).
Add in some monetary issues, confiscate the bow for sure, threaten the vehicle. I"m not sure what amount, but at least the value of the animals as both were illegal at that point. And likely the value of the tag for 5 years you can't hunt tossed in.
RE asking, I don't see an issue, simply because he is asking the "hunters" peers how pissed they are and what they would consider fair for stealing from them. He isn't asking a pimp waht the penalty for a prostitute would be or similar situations.
Sorry, but the idea of getting someone of that "caliber" teaching anything to kids strikes me as just wrong...
Dutch, correction: the second animal was a poach. He'd already killed a trophy and found it and harvested the antlers off the rotten meat. Then he went out hunting again and shot the second animal (the rag horn) an animal for which he did not have a tag.
They were both "poached" in the sense that neither was legal given his actions
The first was illegal due to not tagging, and the second due to the fact he knowingly killed over his limit by using a tag that should have gone on the antlers.
^^^^ This is correct. Nice summary of the gravamen of the crime.
As stated above, "CA Elk tags are few and far between".
Three years loss of hunting Lic..
No Elk tag forever.
Stiff fine.
And ALLOT of community service.
This sounds appropriate...I'm kind of wondering if he's poached them before.
FARMINGTON � A Wilton man has been sentenced to one year in prison for sexually assaulting two young girls.
Peter Essman was also sentenced last week to four years of probation and ordered to register as a sex offender for 10 years.
The 65-year-old Essman pleaded guilty earlier this month to one felony count of unlawful sexual contact and one misdemeanor charge of unlawful sexual touching. The state dismissed two identical charges in a plea agreement.
Prosecutors say Essman touched the victims unlawfully under the guise of giving them back rubs between Feb. 2, 2011, and Feb. 1, 2012.
Essman�s attorney tells the Sun Journal that his client is remorseful.
So, are you bothered that uncle pervy didn't get hit hard enough, or that folks here are too hard on the poacher?
In Alaska, you can loose the item that got you to the animal. In Alaska that can be a plane, which can be $30k - $80k and more. I've seen it happen on some marginal stuff. Makes you wonder the balance between violating a human and an animal.
Late night vodka Friday the thread title looked like "Question: appropriate punishment for poking an elf??" S'pose Freud would be thrilled. I don't wanna even think about rude/unnatural acts with an elf, never mind uncle pervy.
Lots of speculation here. The facts don't indicate a desire to poach elk as he left his truck. If he left the antlers or found some other elk not his own only minor violations. Since he did take the antlers a fine and some type of license suspension, neither huge would seem to be appropriate. Reflecting our own hunting ethics tha exceed the standard of law isn't how the case should be judged.
Wardens in CA are like most LEOs some are terrific and some are terrible. They don't have to deal with career criminals druggies and wife beaters as often but the guys they chase know how to shoot and carry weapons a little more capable than a 32 S&W. Most encounters I've had were very professional but I know guys who have experienced the other end of the spectrum.