Yeah, but if he had gotten away clean, he would have been bragging to his buddies. Good job Idaho !
At our last meeting, the Department's Chief Law Enforcement Officer spent some time with us to get our input on two things in particular:
1. What criteria should they use to designate a poached deer, elk, antelope or sheep as being of 'trophy' quality.
2. What should the penalties be for said poaching.
Re. the penalty for poaching a Desert Bighorn sheep in CA, I recommended, only somewhat in jest, "Death by hanging."
They are thieves and criminals who give hunters a bad name!
During the course of the hearing when the investigating officer was asked what had happened to the antlers he stated that the defendant had told him that he had tossed them up in a palo verde tree at his sisters. My wife let out a comment under her breath indicating that somehow she didn't quite believe that a man who had just shot a 200 inch mule deer with a bow would toss the antlers into a tree.
Because he had not surrendered antlers or meat and had evasive answers on to the whereabouts of them he got the maximum penalty allowed. 5 years no license, 4000 fine lost his archery equipment.
They do not follow the law which makes them not Sportsmen who do follow the law, nevertheless, they do hunt for an animal...their method is not cool though.
Are drivers who speed "crminals"? Yes. To the pedestrian or cyclist, do they give drivers a bad name? Yes. Are they still drivers? Yes.
They are lawbreakers and in NO WAY represent the lawful hunting community!
Shame on you for claiming otherwise!
You can't go through life operating on emotion...
It has EVERYTHING to do with ethics and respect for wildlife.
Shame on you if you don't agree with that!
Fines and jail time to fit the crime which should vary for the specie and trophy class. I don't think the same penalty is due for a guy who kills a WT doe for meat and the guy who kills a Bighorn without a tag.
"HDE, they're not hunters" READ my post
"HDE, you sound stupid." READ my post
And the wolf pack is loose! Is that the best ya'll can do?
I made a rebuttal, then said why as misguided as it was/is for you. Obviously you disagree based on your definition. Objectively, can you argue different?
Emotions have everything to do with it. Made you mad and it shows. READ MY POST - don't make it worse by guessing.
YOU DIDN'T POST ANYTHING other than a totally unsupported and undocumented claim.
(j) "Hunting" means chasing, driving, flushing, attracting, pursuing, worrying, following after or on the trail of, shooting at, stalking, or lying in wait for, any wildlife whether or not such wildlife is then or subsequently captured, killed, taken, or wounded. Such term does not include stalking, attracting, searching for, or lying in wait for, any wildlife by an unarmed person solely for the purpose of watching wildlife or taking pictures thereof.
Notice it says nothing about having a license or tag or doing the "hunting" during an open season.
So ... According to Idaho law, HDE is correct. Poachers are hunters. Just illegal hunters.
Being close minded, regardless of us all knowing the difference, is what they cash in on. When you you don't pause long enough to consider what is being said, you lose. Name calling is the pinnacle they seek then feast on.
They DO hunt animals but unfortunately they do it unethically, illegally, unsafely, etc..
I understand the semantics involved but this sort of tit-for-tat childish arguing is exactly what the anti-hunting establishment loves to see.
Grow up and stand together
If you're talking about the loss of hunting rights, you're probably correct. Most poachers won't care. They'd just keep poaching.
OTOH, if you're talking about the number of animals poachers take every year, you're dead wrong. It numbers in the tens of thousands.
In Africa, the problem is multiple times worse.
Glad we got that settled. Now we need to get that changed. Hunters have worked hard to earn a sporting reputation and to show that we care for the animals and the habitat they live in. Promoting ourselves as the ultimate conservationist. And a simple play on words can instantly change that perspective in the eyes of those who don't understand.
The bad aspects of hunting have always been portrayed, you can thank Disney for that. So, the only ones to change the definition are 'Hunters' themselves.
So the definition of Hunting is in fact wrong.
Glad we got that settled. Now (we) Hunters! need to get that changed. Hunters (Most Bowsite Members and the like) have worked hard to earn a sporting reputation and to show that (we) care for the animals and the habitat they live in. Promoting ourselves as the ultimate conservationist. And a simple play on words can instantly change that perspective in the eyes of those (The Public) who don't understand.
I think we just said the same thing, just in a different way. Man I am so tired of trying to be politically correct. Where did common sense go????
Lets argue about definitions.
Next word up
I don't see anybody lining up to adopt any...
All poaches are hunters; some hunters are poachers. End of semantic distinction. If you don't care to deal in Facts, you may as well sign on with the Antis.
Funny, though, how the Newsies always manage to nail the distinction between a paying customer and an armed robber, even though both left the store carrying merchandise and some cash...
- Having a loaded gun or bow 1 minute after legal shooting light (1/2 before sunset in my state).
- shooting an animal that is not in season
- hunting on private land that you do not have a state authorized slip with the landowners address, number of acres owned and signature on
- shooting an animal 1 minute before legal shooting light starts
- taking an animal with a non approved caliber, non approved broadhead, non approved arrow weight or low draw weight
The list goes on...
The reason I post this is to help us get a better grid for what is considered "poaching". In some states, it doesn't matter if you shot and animal or not. Poaching is the simple violation of any of these rules.
You're opinion is valued as well.......just understand that some on here believe they are larger than life itself.....and always seem to remind us about it....all while they pat themselves on their back! :) Carry on.
A mistake is picking up 2% milk instead of 1%. Making a conscious decision to break the law is not a mistake. It's a premeditated decision. They are in no way related.
Nobody wants to own up to their awful decisions. Saying it was a "mistake" somehow lets them disassociate themselves from the horrible thing they have done.