# ND Deer Poachers



## defendthehunt (Dec 11, 2004)

Is anybody else wondering about the seemingly small punishment handed out to the deer poachers in Valley City?

I have been incredibly busy the past couple weeks, and missed most of the inews surrounding this. Has anyone seen/heard about this? Is it being discussed elsewhere that I am missing?

If I heard right it was something like loss of hunting rights for ONE year and a fine of only $250-$500??

Is this right?
Steve


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

http://www.nodakoutdoors.com/forums/vie ... hp?t=10259

Check Here Steve There is a little more info here. They did get off waaaaayyyyy to easy!!!!!

Bob


----------



## Dick Monson (Aug 12, 2002)

DTH, get your legislator to submit this baby!

Partial Bill History 
This bill has been introduced down here in Iowa to help curb the poaching of trophy whitetails. This should get anyone's attention who is considering such a heinous act. The only thing that I would like clarified is antlers found on previously killed bucks (roadkills, etc). ND should adapt this and have the proceeds go to PLOTS

Bill Introduced: H.J. 86.2 
Complete Bill History 
Bill Text 
PAG LIN 
1 1 Section 1. Section 481A.130, subsection 1, paragraph g, 
1 2 Code Supplement 2003, is amended by striking the paragraph and 
1 3 inserting in lieu thereof the following: 
1 4 NEW PARAGRAPH. g. For each antlered deer, reimbursement 
1 5 shall be based on the point score of the antlered deer as 
1 6 measured by the Boone and Crockett club's scoring system for 
1 7 whitetail deer as follows: 
1 8 (1) Less than 100 points: Two thousand dollars and eighty 
1 9 hours of community service or, in lieu of the community 
1 10 service, a total of four thousand dollars. 
1 11 (2) 100-125 points: Four thousand dollars and eighty 
1 12 hours of community service or, in lieu of the community 
1 13 service, a total of eight thousand dollars. 
1 14 (3) 126-150 points: Six thousand dollars and eighty hours 
1 15 of community service or, in lieu of the community service, a 
1 16 total of twelve thousand dollars. 
1 17 (4) 151-170 points: Eight thousand dollars and eighty 
1 18 hours of community service or, in lieu of the community 
1 19 service, a total of sixteen thousand dollars. 
1 20 (5) More than 170 points: A minimum of ten thousand 
1 21 dollars or such additional amount as is deemed reasonable in 
1 22 the discretion of the court and eighty hours of community 
1 23 service or, in lieu of the community service, a minimum of 
1 24 twenty thousand dollars or such additional amount as is deemed 
1 25 reasonable in the discretion of the court. 
1 26 EXPLANATION 
1 27 This bill increases the damages payable to the state by a 
1 28 person convicted of unlawfully selling, taking, catching, 
1 29 killing, injuring, destroying, or possessing any antlered deer 
1 30 at any time. The bill provides that for any antlered deer, 
1 31 reimbursement shall be based on the point score of the 
1 32 enduring trophy characteristics of the deer (such as antlers 
1 33 and skulls) as measured by the Boone and Crockett club's 
1 34 scoring system for measuring native North American big game, 
1 35 as it pertains to whitetail deer. 
2 1 The Boone and Crockett club's point score and the 
2 2 corresponding damages payable are as follows: 
2 3 1. Less than 100 points: $2,000 and 80 hours of community 
2 4 service or, in lieu of the community service, a total of 
2 5 $4,000. 
2 6 2. 100-125 points: $4,000 and 80 hours of community 
2 7 service or, in lieu of the community service, a total of 
2 8 $8,000. 
2 9 3. 126-150 points: $6,000 and 80 hours of community 
2 10 service or, in lieu of the community service, a total of 
2 11 $12,000. 
2 12 4. 151-170 points: $8,000 and 80 hours of community 
2 13 service or, in lieu of the community service, a total of 
2 14 $16,000. 
2 15 5. More than 170 points: A minimum of $10,000 or such 
2 16 additional amount as is deemed reasonable in the discretion of 
2 17 the court and 80 hours of community service or, in lieu of the 
2 18 community service, a minimum of $20,000 or such additional 
2 19 amount as is deemed reasonable in the discretion of the court.


----------



## Militant_Tiger (Feb 23, 2004)

I just don't see why such measures haven't been implimented sooner. With such stiff penalties we wouldn't have these problems today. Those people essientally got away with a slap on the wrist, disgusting.


----------



## Matt Jones (Mar 6, 2002)

Were they poaching bucks? You'd think that if they were, especially if they were trophy caliber animals, that it would have been mentinoned in the press release.


----------



## drjongy (Oct 13, 2003)

Bucks, does, fawns...I don't really care. These people got off with nothing more than a slap on the wrist.

2 years probation, loss of hunting for a year, $250 fine....big deal.

Apparently they don't need a license anyway, so how is this going to prevent these slobs from doing the same thing in the future.

I say take their guns, vehicles, loss of hunting in ND for life, as well as a fine that will make it hurt for a while.


----------



## Matt Jones (Mar 6, 2002)

I'm curious because some are making it sound as if these guys were out shining and poaching trophy bucks and I have yet to read anywhere that was the case. Since that hasn't been clarified by anyone, and since if they were poaching bucks it would have, it leads me to believe they were shooting does. It's probably just some farmer trying to thin the deer out on his property. Hell, I have relatives in IA that shoot anywhere from 50-100 deer every summer and have to leave them to rot under depredation permits. At least these guys were making use of the meat.

If they were does I really don't care, at least not enough to throw the book at these guys. I'd put it on the same level as farmers shooting geese in the spring and summer while everyone looks the other way. Oh, I forgot...they have their "permits." :roll: Seriously, who cares. If there isn't a harsh enough winter to wipe out some of the herd soon we'll probably see county prosecutors up here doing what they do in some parts of KS and other states; publicly declaring they won't prosecute deer poaching violations altogther. This "slap on the wrist" is probably just a stepping stone to that.

Besides, we all know the deer hunters in this state don't care enough to push the legislature to pass harsher consequences anyways. So I don't see things changing anytime soon.


----------



## SiouxperDave25 (Oct 6, 2002)

Matt Jones said:


> I'm curious because some are making it sound as if these guys were out shining and poaching trophy bucks and I have yet to read anywhere that was the case. Since that hasn't been clarified by anyone, and since if they were poaching bucks it would have, it leads me to believe they were shooting does. It's probably just some farmer trying to thin the deer out on his property. Hell, I have relatives in IA that shoot anywhere from 50-100 deer every summer and have to leave them to rot under depredation permits. At least these guys were making use of the meat.
> 
> If they were does I really don't care, at least not enough to throw the book at these guys. I'd put it on the same level as farmers shooting geese in the spring and summer while everyone looks the other way. Oh, I forgot...they have their "permits." :roll: Seriously, who cares. If there isn't a harsh enough winter to wipe out some of the herd soon we'll probably see county prosecutors up here doing what they do in some parts of KS and other states; publicly declaring they won't prosecute deer poaching violations altogther. This "slap on the wrist" is probably just a stepping stone to that.
> 
> Besides, we all know the deer hunters in this state don't care enough to push the legislature to pass harsher consequences anyways. So I don't see things changing anytime soon.


I agree completely Matt. If they were just shooting does and not wasting the meat, I think the punishment is adequate.


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

So Matt, Super D 
Why should North Dakota have any laws then. If they should be allowed to "get off easy" because these were just does, Maybe we should just let everyone shoot what ever amount of game they wish and sit back and say it is no big deal.

Needless to say I disagree with both of you. They Broke the Law that is in place, right now, today!!

I don't buy the depredation thing as there are laws in place for that also. The Laws that are in place for this infraction in North Dakota are to soft IMO. Breaking the law is breaking the law no matter how you look at it.

Bob


----------



## Remmi_&amp;_I (Dec 2, 2003)

It is disgusting how easy they got off. I am sorry, but we have become a society full of apathy. The fines should have been more like 10 times of what they were. Atleast enough to COMPLETELY cover the cost of all time/effort of the work put in on those days. Then enough to help a habitat project!


----------



## njsimonson (Sep 24, 2002)

When one of you gets charged with DUI, or Driving without Insurance or some other B-Misdemeanor, (which is what the charges were against these two) I'll sit here and say BOY I WISH A COURT COULD FINE so-and-so $15,000. But you know what, a court can't. Because the max fine for a B-Mis is $1,000 in North Dakota. I so rarely see fines over $400 in Municipal Court for B-Misdemeanors...this was an eye opener! They DID NOT GET OFF EASY!!!

Seriously, these guys, who were minor accomplices in this whole situation (there are still 6 to be charged with numerous offenses) LOST A YEAR OF HUNTING! No pheasants, no grouse, no antelope, no deer, no doves, no ducks, no geese, no bow, no shotgun, no rifle, for ONE WHOLE YEAR. Think about that!

What would that do to you? You think you'd be ****** for a year? Yeah. Disappointed in yourself when the rest of your friends and family are out in the field. Yeah. Have to look your kids, your coworkers, buddies, or worse your dog, in the eye and say, "I screwed up, no birds this year buddy. " That seems like a suitable punishment to me. And I've had a week or so to think about this, as I have been debating and defending the court since the decision came out.

If you want more of my take on this matter check out the "Poachers Caught" thread on Fishing Buddy, names the same. At least many of you on here have refrained from blindly insulting the judge and the prosecutor in this case, and I appreciate that.

Everyone acts like this is some big METH case. Like 5-10 years in prison is the solution for these two. I think the 12 months of hunting celibacy is punishment enough.

And by the way, this sentence was reached by PLEA AGREEMENT. The prosecutor did what she thought was in the best interest of the state. I don't know her reasoning behind it, but I'd say she is a fair and competent attorney who handles over 400 cases a year in District Court, and I am certain she did her job properly, in the best interest of the state. She is also an avid hunter and angler, and has been practicing law for over 20 years.


----------



## buckseye (Dec 8, 2003)

> What would that do to you? You think you'd be ticked for a year? Yeah. Disappointed in yourself when the rest of your friends and family are out in the field. Yeah. Have to look your kids, your coworkers, buddies, or worse your dog, in the eye and say, "I screwed up, no birds this year buddy. " That seems like a suitable punishment to me. And I've had a week or so to think about this, as I have been debating and defending the court since the decision came out.


I agree with nj.... I've thought this all along.


----------



## DJRooster (Nov 4, 2002)

Seems to me that one of our locals got $50-100 for shooting a hen pheasant this year. Sounds to me like their punishment is a little on the light side. Matt, can't agree with your logic because are you saying that game is abundant so it isn't so bad to poach? What other laws are you willing to compromise out in the field? If a landowner has too many deer there are other ways to control deer besides poaching. I think that to say they had too many deer on their property and they are thinning the herd to protect their property is speculation until we know more details. I speculate that stupid people do stupid things and sooner or later they get caught. With the large nunbers of animals involved I am shocked at the penalty.


----------



## DJRooster (Nov 4, 2002)

And yes people are embarrassed when they get caught but from what I understand they were bragging about their ignorance before they were caught. I can't believe that people who will come on this website and pass judgement for putting a boat in a slough or hiring a guide will defend a bunch of pure and simple renegade poachers. Hell, the one guy is involved with the school business as an educational leader. I'm sure he is embarassed about his poor lack of judgement and failure to handle peer pressure. One deer is bad enough but a pile of deer? Pretty hard to say it isn't that big of a deal.


----------



## DJRooster (Nov 4, 2002)

Oh and the embarassment only works for people who have a conscience and did these guys have a conscience?? Some people can look you in the eye and lie without batting an eye because they think the whole world is just as dumb as they are!! Sorry but I cannot defend their postiions!! Amen!!!


----------



## buckseye (Dec 8, 2003)

Maybe when the ring leader is convicted we will see stiffer punishment, the ones we are talking about now were the least involved the way I understand it.

"Can't shoot the pig for watching the fox steal the hen".... nj your supposed to say that :lol:


----------



## njsimonson (Sep 24, 2002)

Buckseye, good saying. I had never heard of it prior to your post. I'll say it next time, but lets hope there isn't a next time.


----------



## buckseye (Dec 8, 2003)

nj... Long ago when I was a teenager I watched some friends take a swim in the local public swimming pool. I was dragged into court and almost convicted of crimminal trespass, the judge reminded the prosecuting attorney about "not killing the pig for watching the fox steal the hen". It was his way of saying the long arm of the law has to stop somewhere. The good ol days!! :wink:


----------



## drjongy (Oct 13, 2003)

I can't believe these people are being defended by some on this thread?!?!

There were many times this fall when I was walking back to the vehicle with my limit of pheasants and could have shot more. The survival rate for roosters is only around 25% anyway, so the winter will probably kill most the birds I passed up. Does this mean I should have shot them because I would get "good use" out of their meat rather than let them rot away in the field.

These people lost their hunting for a year...big whoop. They didn't use a license for the poached deer, what is going to stop them from hunting without a license next year? Apparently they already demonstrated they don't have to follow the laws.

Some people on this site get more upset about field vs. slough hunting (which are both legal activities), than something _illegal_ like shooting 30 deer.

I really don't see the difference whether it was bucks or does. When someone illegally takes any game, and knows they are taking it illegally, it shouldn't matter if it's a fish, bird or deer. They knew what they were doing, and more than likely, they disobey the law in other areas as well.

This is an issue about respect....respect for the law, for nature, for your fellow outdoorsmen. These people don't have any respect for these issues, and therefore I have no respect for them. I could care less if they never hunt in North Dakota again.


----------



## buckseye (Dec 8, 2003)

drjongy.. we are not defending them, it's just that we have committed our selves to living with what the court has deemed justice.


----------



## jacks (Dec 2, 2003)

Matt, What a stupid post you had there. It's amazing you are ok with this but you were the first to post about the guys who poached the white bass.

"This is getting ridiculous...what is this? The 4th MAJOR poaching bust on Hmongs this summer? There's already been 3 I think in MN. This is getting out of hand. 
Matt Jones

...and another boatload of 5,000 Hmong is on it's way to St. Paul. They need to pass some laws where immigrants need to take classes on our game regulations in order to purchase a license. "

Looks like our residents need to learn as well.


----------



## holmsvc (Nov 26, 2003)

Even if they were just does there was tags left in that unit to buy. They could have bought all the tags they wanted. I don't know how anyone can defend this. :******:


----------



## Matt Jones (Mar 6, 2002)

You make a good point jacks and I can see where those two posts come off conflicting and somewhat hypocritical. However, I still stand by what I said and do think they are different.

Different animals have different values. Poaching a whitetail doe is not the same as poaching a bighorn sheep. Or even the same as poaching a trophy whitetail buck for that matter. It's at about the same level as farmers driving around shooting geese with rifles in the spring (which to a lot of them is about the same as stepping on a cockroach).

Poaching is stealing. These guys broke the law. I am not debating this or defending their actions. The only thing I am disagreeing with anyone on is the value of what they stole and what the subsequent consequences should then be. IMO, their penalties fit the amount of what they stole.

Some of you are trying to argue that they broke the law and that stealing is stealing and they should have the book thrown at them regardless. Obviously I disagree. I just don't think that a person who steals a loaf of bread should be penalized the same as a person who steals a car.


----------



## drjongy (Oct 13, 2003)

Give it up Matt, you're digging yourself a bigger hole.


----------



## Matt Jones (Mar 6, 2002)

drjongy said:


> Give it up Matt, you're digging yourself a bigger hole.


So I guess if I don't agree with you and you're tunnel vision then I'm digging myself a hole? More great logic on your behalf. :roll:

At least the judge agrees with me! :lol:


----------



## jacks (Dec 2, 2003)

Matt, not trying to be a jerk, but which do you feel has a higher value a white bass or a deer?


----------



## Fallguy (Jan 23, 2004)

What fun reading about you guys arguing!

I think that these poachers got off easy. One of you (can't remember which) mentioned how the taking of their liscense is a joke because obviously they don't need a liscense. That seems logical...they can just go out and kill 30 deer again! I think guns and vehicles used in the acts should be taken. Make these blockheads go through the hassle, time and money of replacing weapons and methods of transportation. Put a little pressure on them!

All I know is this...I will sleep more soundly tonight knowing that I have more hunting ethics and respect for nature than these clowns involved in this case have! I hope the rest of you can say the same.


----------



## drjongy (Oct 13, 2003)

Matt Jones said:


> So I guess if I don't agree with you and you're tunnel vision then I'm digging myself a hole? More great logic on your behalf. :roll:


That's exactly what I'm saying...you're propagating an illegal activity--poaching deer.



Matt Jones said:


> ...it leads me to believe they were shooting does. It's probably just some farmer trying to thin the deer out on his property. Hell, I have relatives in IA that shoot anywhere from 50-100 deer every summer and have to leave them to rot under depredation permits. At least these guys were making use of the meat.
> 
> If they were does I really don't care....


----------



## Matt Jones (Mar 6, 2002)

jacks said:


> Matt, not trying to be a jerk, but which do you feel has a higher value a white bass or a deer?


White bass aren't overpopulated and causing problems. I don't feel the white bass population needs to be greatly reduced, and I feel the whitetail deer population does. Hence my different feelings on the two. Please note that my opinion is only applicable to does, bucks are a different story.

I am not propagating poaching. I shouldn't have said I don't care, because I do care. I just don't care enough to throw the book at these guys like others do, which is what I meant. I apologize for not being more specific.

What these guys did was illegal and wrong and they should be punished for it, I think we all agree on that. I'm not arguing that they shouldn't be punished. I'm just saying I think the punishment they recieved was adequate. That's all. Obviously some of you don't agree with me and that's fine. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion.


----------



## Matt Jones (Mar 6, 2002)

Here's a hypothetical question for some of you...

Let's say a group of guys were busted for shooting 30 cormorants; would all of you who have taken the hardline stance on poaching feel the same way about that? Would you want to see maximum penalties sentenced?

They broke the law and poached. Should the punishment be even more severe since cormorants are a federally protected species (where as deer are not)?


----------



## BigDaddy (Mar 4, 2002)

> I think guns and vehicles used in the acts should be taken. Make these blockheads go through the hassle, time and money of replacing weapons and methods of transportation. Put a little pressure on them!


You know, I was thinking this too. I was raised in MN, and it is always big news there in a poaching case to discuss the vehicles and equipment that they lose. In fact, folks used to flock to the state auctions each year to buy confiscated equipment. In most cases, the fine is the cheapest thing involved.

I never hear about this sort of thing in ND. Why?


----------



## Maverick (Mar 4, 2002)

They don't list things like that in the paper. We were up in Lakota for Greenskins getogethor 2 years ago, and ended up meeting the game wardens right after they had taken the guns of some hunters that shot over their limit. It happens pretty much everytime just not as big of a magnitude.


----------



## Goldy's Pal (Jan 6, 2004)

Wow, poaching deer is a bad one. letting the violation go as no big deal won't send much of a message to the innocent either will it? How many guys who hunt now and cry about the cost of everything or even don't, will just say the hell with it and take their chances on a cry baby fine or suspension? Maybe the deer are overpopulated and it's just a drop in the bucket but the DNR sets regs for a reason and if it isn't right the way it is set up with lottery, zones, seasons, etc., and there is too many of this, not enough of that, it isn't up to poachers to take what they want and balance the herd. Lay down the smack on all poachers!!!


----------



## Remmi_&amp;_I (Dec 2, 2003)

Maverick said:


> They don't list things like that in the paper. We were up in Lakota for Greenskins getogethor 2 years ago, and ended up meeting the game wardens right after they had taken the guns of some hunters that shot over their limit. It happens pretty much everytime just not as big of a magnitude.


Thanks Mav, I was wondering about that as well.


----------



## Bushwacker (Mar 30, 2003)

I did some checking on the deer laws. Unlawful killing of big game is a class A misdomeaner. It carries a max penalty of $2000 plus a $300 court cost fee. Someone talked about them being a class B crime. I would think that not everyone had the same involvement in this situation and they are being handled on a case by case situation. We need to see what happens to the rest of them before we go off too much. I believe that Valley City has a big wildlife club. I would hope that they are speaking up to the prosecutor and judge that they want the crap to hit the fan. The judge must be fair and unbiased but once they are found guilty the judge should be able to consider public input. If they don't do a good job we can remind them that we won't forget it in the next election.


----------



## Bushwacker (Mar 30, 2003)

I did some checking on the deer laws. Unlawful killing of big game is a class A misdomeaner. It carries a max penalty of $2000 plus a $300 court cost fee. Someone talked about them being a class B crime. I would think that not everyone had the same involvement in this situation and they are being handled on a case by case situation. We need to see what happens to the rest of them before we go off too much. I believe that Valley City has a big wildlife club. I would hope that they are speaking up to the prosecutor and judge that they want the crap to hit the fan. The judge must be fair and unbiased but once they are found guilty the judge should be able to consider public input. If they don't do a good job we can remind them that we won't forget it in the next election.


----------



## holmsvc (Nov 26, 2003)

What I couldn't believe is that they had the balls to show up for the bcwf membership drive and landowner supper.


----------



## stevepike (Sep 14, 2002)

So what happened when they went? Did anyone say anything to them about it or just quietly talk about how they could not believe they showed up?


----------



## DJRooster (Nov 4, 2002)

Ah yes, no conscience. That is why they can poach 30 deer.


----------



## defendthehunt (Dec 11, 2004)

I am afraid that I cannot agree Matt. The fine has to be stiffer if we are to keep others from committing similar crimes. I would say the same for White Bass, DUI, any crime that we wish to prevent from happening.

I have not heard of 30 poached deer in MN, simply for that reason. There are much stiffer fines and penalties and those who are apt to do such things KNOW this.

We will never stop the career criminals, they are the ones who are going to break the law no matter what the penalty. What we, as a society, hope to stop are those who are tempted to commit crimes by putting in place commensurate penalties. In this case a lack of any substantial punishment is where the system failed. If the punishment were the loss of hunting permanently, loss of vehicle, guns, etc, maybe one or two of these people might have done this but I think the rest would have been deterred.

As for the depredation and the need to thin the deer population - if that was the case - I can understand the farmer's or ranchers need to do so, but it must be within the law.

Put a stiffer penalty in place and maybe we 'save' half of these people involved in this case.


----------



## Remmi_&amp;_I (Dec 2, 2003)

defendthehunt said:


> We will never stop the career criminals, they are the ones who are going to break the law no matter what the penalty. What we, as a society, hope to stop are those who are tempted to commit crimes by putting in place commensurate penalties. .


I agree with you on this. When I was in college I worked for a lumber yard in the summer. All it had was a short fence and a couple of gates around its perimeter. It had all of its wood, shingles, paint, doors, etc... basically free for the taking if someone wanted to jump the fence. I talked to my boss (the owner's son) about it and he said the fence and gate was there just to "Keep the honest people honest" and that if someone was determined to steal from them, they would figure out a way to steal no matter what. That quote has always stuck in my mind and I firmly believe it to be true..............in ND anyways.


----------

