|
Post by cambygsp on Oct 26, 2005 5:17:59 GMT -5
Awfull risky for the ICO to make those kind of threats...seeing how it just aint true! A tickett or citation is the SAME thing as an arrest, threatening to arrest a perfectly law abiding citizen & landowner, would not be a very smart career move on behalf of the ICO.....and I doubt that many would do it!
NOW, take into consideration that the hunter was set up on the property line, and knew there was a very good chance the deer would cross over to the anti-hunters property after being shot...and a ICO just may end up giving the hunter a very stern tounge lashing.
Personally, I would do everything possible to AVOID a confrontation with the anti-hunting landowner....A deer...ANY deer just aint worth it!
|
|
|
Post by duff on Oct 26, 2005 10:23:25 GMT -5
DEC, I wasn't attacking you or your statement. Just making sure most know that a land owner can not get cited for wanton waste for a deer someone else shot. I used to think the same way and was corrected by a person that knows for certain. Anyways like I said if your CO is comfortable with that approach then by all means let him do the threats.
aNother law I was unaware of regarding property lines. If you are hunting with your landowner tag and the deer you shot crosses property lines, legally you are required to tag that deer with a regular hunting license, not a landowner tag. I just found that out this year.
|
|
|
Post by gobblerstopper on Oct 26, 2005 11:01:05 GMT -5
...I was simply passing on what I was told... dec, I have been told pretty much the same thing by two different officers. Except they were not going to cite the landowner for wanton waste.
|
|
|
Post by kevin1 on Oct 26, 2005 12:19:16 GMT -5
A land owner can't be cited for wanton waste when an animal crosses property lines. That would be like citing people who get into deer/car accidents with wanton waste, IMO. They can be cited for posession of a deer without a license , not many PETA types buy licenses .
|
|
|
Post by dec on Oct 26, 2005 13:40:49 GMT -5
DEC, I wasn't attacking you or your statement. ... aNother law I was unaware of regarding property lines. If you are hunting with your landowner tag and the deer you shot crosses property lines, legally you are required to tag that deer with a regular hunting license, not a landowner tag. I just found that out this year. I know you were not attacking me. I just get a little frustrated at how info flies around on the internet. All is cool, Duff. I'm no law enforcement expert so I rely on what an actual officer generally tells me. If a C.O. tells me something, I generally take it as the rule. The exact same officer also told me exactly what you said about the land owner tag. He said that once that deer leaves your property, the land owner tag is no longer valid. However, I think I read another C.O. (might have been GreenDeem, but can't remember) post that that was not the case. I'm pretty sure I read that either on here or at housierhunting.com. So I guess I don't know what the real answer is on this as well as the other topic.
|
|
|
Post by jkd on Oct 26, 2005 15:39:01 GMT -5
Duff,
The question Dec responded to was mine to Greendeem on the HH site, but the post is no longer there...
His response was that if a landowner shoots a deer on his property and the deer goes down on an adjoining property, you don't need a regular tag to recover it (but you do need that landowners permission). My understanding of what he said is that it's where you're hunting when the deer is shot that determines the license requirement status, not where it is recovered.
May be a difference of opinion among ICO's on this one... will see if I can get further clarification...
KD
|
|
|
Post by duff on Oct 26, 2005 17:19:49 GMT -5
That is the most logical to me, but I had an Uncle from Laport Co who had this happen to him a few years ago and when he spoke with the local CO he told him he needed to get a regular tag to go retrieve it. He did have permission to get the deer too. He just told me about it this past summer and I thought he was wrong about that cause it makes no sence what so ever. Then I saw it on one of these sites again so assumed he was told right.
|
|
|
Post by cambygsp on Oct 26, 2005 18:29:53 GMT -5
The way I understand the landowner thing.....
As long as you shoot the deer/animal on YOUR property....it don't matter where it runs to. With that said, if you carry your weapon with you off your property....then you are hunting and you better have a tag in your posession.
So in the case of a landowner exempt hunter having to leave their property to recover a deer, you had better take your weapon back to the house/camp/truck, prior to leaving your property.
Same thing applies if you have to cross property lines to get to or from your hunting spot. If your carrying a hunting weapon, it constitutes hunting. Sometimes that may make it difficult to get in with the wind in your favor.
The way the bonus county's work now....even if your a landowner you may want topurchase a bonus tag. That way you will be legal carrying a deer hunting weapon off your property.....and the bonus countys are good from Oct. 1 till the last day of the season now!!!!
$24.00 is like a "toll" so you can get to your stand without a deer winding you!
|
|
|
Post by gobblerstopper on Oct 26, 2005 19:03:33 GMT -5
They can be cited for posession of a deer without a license , not many PETA types buy licenses . That is what I was told. If they wouldn't allow the CO to go and get the deer then they would be assuming possession and would be required to take the deer. Now, if they are assuming possession and do not tag the deer....isn't that wanton waste among other things. Granted most of them do not buy license's, but they really wouldn't need one since it is on their property and they could probably put a landowner tag on the deer. I bet more PETA type's buy licenses than you think. I would bet that an awful lot of them put in for the military/refuge/state park hunts to try to take a tag from a hunter.
|
|
|
Post by duff on Oct 26, 2005 19:25:23 GMT -5
I am not any way schooled in any laws other then what I try to obide by. But how can a landowner who doesn't allow access to their land get cited for possession of a deer if they don't retrieve it?
I understand most of these situations are theoretical and an attempt to legally get a downed deer, but to me that is like saying people who hit a deer with their vehicle is responsibe for taging the deer even when they leave it there to rot. I know they need a tag to take it home though.
|
|
|
Post by gobblerstopper on Oct 27, 2005 14:06:51 GMT -5
duff, I think the thing that most people here are not realizing is the fact that a landowner can be cited for many things if the officer feels he is guilty of such and I'm sure some criteria has to be met in each case. It is up to the prosecutor and officer to prove that the landowner is guilty and convince the judge of such. I'm sure everyone can think of at least one case that didn't go the way it should have. Awfull risky for the ICO to make those kind of threats...seeing how it just aint true! A tickett or citation is the SAME thing as an arrest, threatening to arrest a perfectly law abiding citizen & landowner, would not be a very smart career move on behalf of the ICO.....and I doubt that many would do it! That is about the same as saying any officer that wrote a citation that the person was later found not guilty made a bad career move. It happens. Officers sometimes make "judgement calls" that the judge later disagrees with.
|
|
|
Post by mbogo on Oct 27, 2005 14:17:29 GMT -5
Excellent point. It is entirely likely that such a citation will not be upheld in court, but how many people would rather allow a hunter to retrieve his deer than to face the hassle of fighting a citation.
|
|