|
Post by Decatur on Apr 10, 2009 0:48:50 GMT -5
Michigan Trophy Hunts Arraigned On 54 Counts
The owner and operator of a privately-owned cervid facility in Saginaw County have been arraigned in Saginaw County 70th District Court on a 54-count warrant resulting from a year-long investigation into their game hunting facility located in Bannister.
Janet Turner, 74, the owner of Michigan Trophy Hunts, and her son Scott, 45, who operated the facility, were arraigned Wednesday before Judge Kyle Higgs Tarrant. The Turners were released on a $97,000 personal recognizance bond.
The Turners are charged with 54 counts, including two felony counts of animal cruelty to animals/livestock and conspiracy to commit animal cruelty; and multiple misdemeanor counts of illegal importation of elk into Michigan, failure to maintain animal health records, enclosure violations, animal at large and health code violations.
In March 2008, the Departments of Natural Resources and Agriculture launched a joint investigation into the facility after receiving complaints about illegal importation of elk and animal cruelty at the Turner facility. The Law Enforcement Division of the DNR and MDA officials gathered evidence which resulted in a search warrant of the Turner facility to inventory their elk, deer and business records.
The investigation confirmed animals were allegedly smuggled into the state while Michigan’s borders were closed to any out-of-state importation of elk and deer. The importation ban was placed on Michigan by the MDA in April 2002 as a result of western states contracting Chronic Wasting Disease (CWD). Records showed that the Turners had allegedly illegally imported elk from Iowa, Colorado, Minnesota and Canada.
If found guilty, the Turners could each possibly face four years in prison for each felony count of animal cruelty and conspiracy to commit such felonies; $15,000 in fines; up to 500 hours of community service or any combination of penalties. The judge may also order psychiatric evaluations, and may order the cost of care, housing or veterinary care. The judge also may order that the Turners not own or possess an animal. The misdemeanor charges range from 30 to 90 days in jail and fines from $300 to $2,500.
I wish they were outlawed everywhere!
|
|
|
Post by jrbhunter on Apr 10, 2009 2:07:26 GMT -5
"I wish they were outlawed everywhere"To follow this statement with your signature "Annoy a liberal, use facts & logic" wouldn't we need to post a few thousand cases of poaching, party hunting, illegal weapons, breaking limits and other violations committed by those not affiliated with high fence? I mean, the factual law of averages tells us that violations are exponentially higher to occur in fair chase conditions. So, logically, the safest bet to reduce violations would be to outlaw free range hunting. Might as well be factual and logical. Right? My county is comprised of exactly 487 square miles of land, approximately 200 acres of that is high fenced. The 365-24/7 law enforcement and health inspection manpower dedicated to that 200 acre parcel is mandated, meticulous and persistent per numerous agencies. The other 311,480 acres is patrolled by two of those officers – but only when reports are called in. Seems little could be overlooked on a preserve, and equally few violations stand a chance of being witnessed outside one. So, do we hire 31,480 conservation officers to keep an equally stringent eye on all these sloppy free-range hunters, or do we ban free-range hunting because of the increased risk of violations it imposes. I see no other option, as you point out... any percentage of bad apples spoils the whole bunch. Let’s LEGISLATE!
|
|
|
Post by huxbux on Apr 10, 2009 6:12:41 GMT -5
How about we publish our disapproval in public forums such as this with such vociferousness that it causes those who operate and patronize these places to be such a subject of derision that it forces the practice to end?
|
|
|
Post by js2397 on Apr 10, 2009 6:28:02 GMT -5
I still can never see the argument against free enterprise. I know there are many worse things than high fenced hunting and they never seem to come under attack here. I know for a fact that alcohol, tobacco, fast food, and porn ruin many more lives than high fenced hunting.
This is kind of like the antigun argument; people have been killed by guns so outlaw guns.
|
|
|
Post by trapperdave on Apr 10, 2009 10:34:04 GMT -5
How about we publish our disapproval in public forums such as this with such vociferousness that it causes those who operate and patronize these places to be such a subject of derision that it forces the practice to end? I agree
|
|
|
Post by jrbhunter on Apr 10, 2009 10:54:51 GMT -5
Huxbux, the collective goal of the "Squeeky Wheels" on this issue are obvious. You want to use tunnel vision on the negatives, to hide the positives, and eradicate a portion of the sport that you do not partake in directly. There are two issues that make that plan fail consistently.
1) There are well informed and educated folks on either side of the argument that won't be swayed by occasional emotion and vague accusations. (You & Me) Then, there are the floaters that may form an opinion based on something as silly as a thread full of back-slapping buddies that agree one way or another. Those folks that would form opinions in an online forum topic: rarely make any impact on serious sporting issues. Those are the hoards of guys that voted in the online polls... and didn't show up to DNR meetings.
2) As briefly discussed in this thread, the logical and common sense approach to the topic is very detrimental to your “Squeaky Wheel” philosophy. Every common sense judge, legislator and officer that has been involved in Indiana’s high fence battle has agreed that emotion was the primary crutch for opposition. In one famous court case, the judge actually asked the Director of the IDNR- “Do you have any facts, or is this all emotion and theory?” The Director was soon replaced after that humiliating testimony and an overall loss of the case his office had been coerced into pushing on behalf of “Squeaky Wheels”.
I don’t mean to come across as attacking anyone; my intentions are to approach the posts and not the posters. I guess I don’t see the need for all the grandstanding and propaganda tossing. It’s an issue of personal choice, not national security or public safety.
Until last winter I had never harvested an animal under high fence. Those harvests were West Texas predators, on 10,000-45,000 acre ranches and I didn’t feel any dirtier when I pulled the trigger. I have no desire to hunt big game in an enclosure; the odds of success are too high for the suspense of a hunt to trip my trigger. Then again, baiting bear dulls that excitement for me as well. Or fully guided elk hunts, or hounded lion hunts, or African jeep safari. Not speaking out against them: I’ll certainly fight to protect the rights of folks who DO participate in those sports. I just can’t fathom waking up one morning with the goal of tearing down minor portions of our hunting community. Period.
Thanks for your time;
|
|
|
Post by trapperdave on Apr 10, 2009 10:59:00 GMT -5
wheres the "sport" in shootin a hand fed buck in your brother's 200 acre pen? Just crinkle the tater chip bag and watch em come a runnin
|
|
|
Post by danf on Apr 10, 2009 12:11:08 GMT -5
Just curious Jason, exactly how are you related to Rodney? You may not have a desire to hunt high-fence, but to get everything out in the open, you are related to someone who derives income from a high-fence shooting operation, are you not?
A high-fence operation in Indiana (and pretty much all of the Midwest) is MUCH different than most high-fence's in Texas.
|
|
|
Post by Decatur on Apr 10, 2009 13:10:16 GMT -5
"I wish they were outlawed everywhere"To follow this statement with your signature "Annoy a liberal, use facts & logic" wouldn't we need to post a few thousand cases of poaching, party hunting, illegal weapons, breaking limits and other violations committed by those not affiliated with high fence? I mean, the factual law of averages tells us that violations are exponentially higher to occur in fair chase conditions. So, logically, the safest bet to reduce violations would be to outlaw free range hunting. Might as well be factual and logical. Right? My county is comprised of exactly 487 square miles of land, approximately 200 acres of that is high fenced. The 365-24/7 law enforcement and health inspection manpower dedicated to that 200 acre parcel is mandated, meticulous and persistent per numerous agencies. The other 311,480 acres is patrolled by two of those officers – but only when reports are called in. Seems little could be overlooked on a preserve, and equally few violations stand a chance of being witnessed outside one. So, do we hire 31,480 conservation officers to keep an equally stringent eye on all these sloppy free-range hunters, or do we ban free-range hunting because of the increased risk of violations it imposes. I see no other option, as you point out... any percentage of bad apples spoils the whole bunch. Let’s LEGISLATE! My statement about wanting them all closed has very little to do with this article. It has to do with the fact that it is NOT hunting, and only hurts the sport!
|
|
|
Post by tickman1961 on Apr 10, 2009 13:26:59 GMT -5
Not all high fence operations are the same and to continue to lump them together is clearly an emotional response.
This board can be very discouraging when it comes to people telling others how to legally take game and highlights the absurdity of hunters vs hunters.....
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Apr 10, 2009 13:45:23 GMT -5
Gents,
Whatever we do on this thread let's address the subject and not persons..
Thanks,
WW
|
|
|
Post by racktracker on Apr 10, 2009 14:03:12 GMT -5
Not all high fence operations are the same and to continue to lump them together is clearly an emotional response. This board can be very discouraging when it comes to people telling others how to legally take game and highlights the absurdity of hunters vs hunters..... "This board"??I've been on all the Indiana boards and this one is by far the most tolerant of other's hunting methods. Don't believe me? Go to one of the other boards and start a thread about one buck rule, crossbows, PCRs, or fenced hunts and see what happens. Put on your Nomex britches first.
|
|
|
Post by jrbhunter on Apr 10, 2009 14:25:11 GMT -5
Just curious Jason, exactly how are you related to Rodney? You may not have a desire to hunt high-fence, but to get everything out in the open, you are related to someone who derives income from a high-fence shooting operation, are you not? A high-fence operation in Indiana (and pretty much all of the Midwest) is MUCH different than most high-fence's in Texas. I didn't realize it was a secret that Rodney is my brother. I'm sure it's exciting to think that everything I've posted here could be erased by tying a correlation between me and someone in the industry: but that changes nothing. I’m not employed there, I have no financial gain there, and the fact is… Rodney himself isn’t as focused on the preserve as you might think. The points I make are structured on logic and fact: and I probably have more personal experience with both sides of this coin than most. When he started Whitetail Bluff I knew nothing about the preserve industry. I did not know a single person that HAD hunted on a preserve, nor a person that WOULD. I was skeptical to say the least, that this could be profitable for him. It wasn't long before I realized that the vast majority of TV shows and videos (VHS then) were being filmed on preserves. This was disheartening for me as a hard-hunting teenager; I’d been naive enough to think that those guys were cranking out monster bucks in the wild: week in and week out. I then learned how whitetail urines were collected, research was performed for articles and photography was taken for magazines. Again, the vast majority was done inside a high fence. I was astonished: the most popular functions and faces and resources of deer hunting were CENTERED on this high fenced world. Of course, his business flourished accordingly. I think his advertising budget consisted of $500 for booth space at one show, and he has turned away hunters every year since he opened the doors. The guys that filled the schedule were PUMPED to be participating in these hunts... and they seemed to take home the same excitement from their weekend afield that I did on the "outside". It was a few years before I was introduced to the "Anti-Preserve" side of the coin. As mentioned earlier, none of my family or friends were interested in PARTAKING in a fenced hunt... but none were dramatic/emotional and outspoken against those that do. I had always assumed if you were “against it” you just wouldn’t “do it”. Then I saw the drama online. After reading a few dozen outrageous threads with drama-queens talking out their asses on both sides, I put 2 and 2 together. The major disconnect seemed to be education. There were hunters clueless about preserves and farmers clueless about hunting… all arguing a molded topic. By chance, I was educated in both courses of study. I probably could’ve been consumed by this “Anti-Preserve Movement” before Rodney had started his business. I was clueless how it worked, I knew what I preferred in a hunt, and I didn’t want to be sold anything short of legitimate videos/pictures/advice/research as it pertained to whitetails. I didn’t realize what the participants really take away from it and I didn’t realize how much of the hunting industry relied on it. I think it’s easy to get swept-away in the emotion of this hot-button issue and make assumptions about the people on the other side. My brothers and I grew up hunting hard, trapping and digging roots. My dad put food on the table for a family of 7 with fur and ginseng money. Rodney’s business didn’t come from a suit & tie background, it didn’t come from a heritage of slob hunters, or half-ass sportsmen. My dad has taken monster muleys & elk, other brother has taken trophy turkeys in numerous states, Rodney has killed trophies in nearly each B&C category- and I’ve killed a ton of mangy varmints that most can’t seem to manipulate. All those critters were earned in fair chase, across 20 states and 3 countries, in terrain and weather conditions that would keep MOST hunters home on the couch. When I read some of these outlandish accusations and otherwise -stirring over Rodney and his operation specifically… I have to smile. Knowing that MANY of the guys that login to these sites just to continue these arguments and spin propaganda couldn’t CARRY WATER for the men they’re so hell-bent on discrediting. If hardnosed, successful and experienced hunters like myself and my friends can wrap our minds around the presence/purpose and place of preserve hunting: I’m certain many of you could do the same with education. Not everyone has the opportunity to see it for what it is, they can only read threads like this and make assumptions. Ignorance is no excuse. You do your thing, I’ll do mine.
|
|
|
Post by indianahick on Apr 10, 2009 15:36:59 GMT -5
If you want to farm deer or elk, collect urine, sell sperm, butcher the animals and sell the meat similar to beef or lamb or pork. Fine and dandy. But to sell what is euphemistically called hunts which should be called killing fields here in the mid west then the answer is no. If you want to compare high fence here to high fence in Texas then you are comparing truck gardens to farming on the large scale. Sorry but there is no comparison between a 112 acre place that is less than 1/2 mile per side to one of 11,000 acres and more than 5 miles per side. Which is negated by the use of passive and mechanical feeders. Ring the dinner bell and watch them come.
|
|
|
Post by jrbhunter on Apr 10, 2009 16:12:16 GMT -5
You make an interesting point Hick, and I don’t think you intended too.
Some 10,000 acre ranches I've done ADC work on were much easier to slaughter whitetails on than the high fences I'm familiar with in the Midwest. Many of the deer on the Texas ranches were eartagged, bottle fed and followed my rig around at night as I shot predators with a 25 caliber weapon over their head. I took cell phone pictures of a 160” whitetail following my partner (at 10 yards) while he was retrieving a fox I shot with a 10 gauge 3-1/2” load. This was 6 miles from the highway and no homes or ranch facilities were on this particular place. Just a vacant air strip and a few oil rigs.
Also, as you point out, many Ranches in Texas are sprawling open desert.... a hunter can shoot 800 yards in any direction. This quickly reduces the scope of challenge on a 10,000 acre enclosure. From well positioned (heated) blinds, he can watch a couple feeders and dozed shooting lanes. On his drive in, he can turn on the tailgate feeder so the deer will rush to the road behind him. Once in his stand, he can ring his fake-feeder to simulate the spillage of more corn.
On the smaller Indiana facilities a guy is lucky to see 50 yards through dense early season vegetation and rugged terrain. He has no legal option for a long range rifle, much less a need for one. He may not bait the deer, as preserves operate under standard IDNR baiting regulations. The ups & downs of the topography turns that 200 acres into what we'd consider 350 acres of surface ground in the farming world. The broader spectrum of food sources, balanced with the applied hunting pressure, makes it much more difficult to SEE, much less harvest, an animal on the Indiana preserves I'm familiar with.
From his statements alone I can tell that it’s unlikely Hick has visited a Texas high fence or an Indiana high fence. The statistics tell us that MOST visitors of this website haven’t visited either. Again, I just cannot imagine throwing so much emotion into a subject in which I had no experience or first-hand knowledge whatsoever. I thought that was reserved for the liberal-left and their scare tactics, propaganda and political machines.
Opinions are one thing, and we’re all entitled. I’ve voiced my opinion on various styles of hunting here: as have others: but you won’t see us talking out our ass in an effort to cut down a sector of the hunting community. For me to hypothesize on African Safari hunting would be foolish- I’ve never been on one and have only done a little reading about it. Don’t you guys feel some need to qualify your outlandish claims and accusations with some credibility or background or experience?
It seems many loosely formed OPINIONS, when left unchallenged, eventually end up being represented as “experiences” online… and the swarm mentality overtakes people who want to fit in. I’ve watched some of these threads spiral out into left field, filled with anti-fodder and blatant lies and ignorant assumptions. Then I’ve posted in threads, like this one, and watched the crowd fall silent for fear of being called to task on their statements. This tells me that ignorance is still an issue, combined with the inherent need to feel “included” in a cause of some sort.
The sky isn't falling.
|
|
|
Post by ribbuster on Apr 10, 2009 16:18:43 GMT -5
Well . Now I understand where such vehement descent against all the cries for more Outfitter strickter regulation of them on public hunting land I called for on here .I still believe that stricter outfitter licensing ,regulation ,and testing should be required .I also thinks still that if an outfitter is going to make money and displace resident hunters on public land by taking paying clients to hunt these properties there should be an outfitting fee for public ground or no outfitters should be allowed to use public state owned land .It stings deep down don't it ,when you feel like others are against you or yours .
Money and greed is and will always be a repugnant force when it comes to natural resources and especially hunting and fishing.If we ever want to be accepted for what we are we must not let the ugly side of the industry take over and push the average deer hunters aside for money and some kind of self serving fame.
This all said If someone wants to hunt a HF preserve thats fine they are paying for it not me .But do not expect hunters to ooh and awww over the animals you take some will but many will not .And I would say with the past few years worth of high profile busts and take downs that were very public and large organizations and folks, do not expect the average hunters to come to the rescue or have favorable things to say about anyone involved in them .
So hunt your hunt and enjoy it .But there needs to be a grass roots movement by hunters to get the fun ,hunter satisfaction ,and Horn porn and greed back to the back burner like it was when a big buck was earned and not expected ,farmed ,or worse legislated.That is what made them special .
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 10, 2009 16:33:30 GMT -5
Curious if a fellow, who happens to be a resident of Indiana, has a family farm of say 3500 acres locked up for himself and two or three of his buds....one day decided to hunt the Hoosier Nat. Forest( or any public lands) --- would he also have to pay a fee to hunt there?
|
|
|
Post by ribbuster on Apr 10, 2009 16:59:10 GMT -5
Curious if a fellow, who happens to be a resident of Indiana, has a family farm of say 3500 acres locked up for himself and two or three of his buds....one day decided to hunt the Hoosier Nat. Forest( or any public lands) --- would he also have to pay a fee to hunt there? Yes we do we are resident tag holders and the big part that many over look in my statement is we are not makeing money from the use or hunting of public land that is paid for by and owned by every citizen in this state lets face it they are makeing money from the resorces and land we all paid for so when dose the state and the people here get thier cut !! .Besides what do you young hunter residents from KY got in it anyways?? ;D
|
|
|
Post by jrbhunter on Apr 10, 2009 17:02:40 GMT -5
Well . Now I understand.... ...It stings deep down don't it ,when you feel like others are against you or yours... No, you certainly don't understand... you simply see an avenue in which to push your agenda. I handed you your ass because your argument was weak and I had the freetime, same reason I continue this discussion on a rainy day. ;D Woody and most other regulars here know me well enough, my input is based on personal convictions not any profit or family ties. I'll show at the meetings, I'll stand eye-to-eye and argue any point you'd like. We've only scratches the surface of my beliefs here: assuming you know where I'm coming from is unfair. Your theory on regulation of outfitters shows you are ignorant in that regaurd as well. Call the HNF headquarters and tell them you are an outfitter that plans to guide turkey hunts on their property this month... get ready to jump through hoops and pull out your checkbook. Tell them you are merely a prostaffer that plans to film on their property: tell me if you feel the regulation already in place isn't assonine. While you're on the phone, ask them if they know any good coyote hunters. I run the largest hunting event on public ground in the state of Indiana, I founded and developed this event in 2005 and titled it the Indiana Predator Challenge. I spend hours, days even, meeting and working with the HNF / FWS and IDNR in relation to my use of this property for a NON-PROFIT event. It can be frustrating and tiring, but they really work with me. I am also friends with officers and agents of HNF property who do have the proper permits required to profit from the sales of guiding and filming on those properties. I do not pariticipate or purchase that content in any way- but I'm familiar with what they've gone through to stay legal. There is a lot of red-tape involved in doing it RIGHT. Even the men and women that help you apply will roll their eyes on a regular basis as you go through pages of "Not Applicable" BS. Again, 95% of the sportsmen using HNF property have no idea how those stipulations on guiding and outfitting read... so as Decatur suggested in the beginning of this thread, we should probably outlaw hunting on public properties to ensure fewer violations.
|
|
|
Post by jrbhunter on Apr 10, 2009 17:06:40 GMT -5
Correction: I realized after posting... that a newly applied outfitter could not get onto HNF in such short notice as I mentioned (this month). It would likely be 4/6 months before he was approved. Which further proves my point- the elusion of "unregulated" outfitters and guides on public land is farfetched at best.
|
|