Don't be that guy

Toad said:
I have a friend who is heavy into waterfowl hunting. He got a personal visit one day from his trash man, and I think the city sent him a letter some time later. I don't think there was a penalty or anything, they just said they wouldn't pick up his trash anymore if he continued to put dead animals in it. He asked what he is supposed to do, and they said they don't care just don't put them in the trash.

In his case, I believe it was nearly full barrels of snow goose carcasses. I'm sure the cans weighed over 100# apiece, and stunk to high heaven since he was chasing them daily at the time. I would guess you would have to do something like that in order to raise any eyebrows.

I think all they did differently after that was to mix around who threw away the carcasses, or split them up instead of throwing them all away at my friend's house every time.
Click to expand...

Yeah that's kinda what I figured the laws/regulations were in place for---more extreme cases.

One of the posters mentioned he freezes the waste prior to tossing it in the trash. Doing so would at least prevent or cut down on the stink during warm temps. Less of an eyebrow raiser.
 
ranchodeluxe said:
Because the guy is wrong, plain and simple. "In Law enforcement" can mean a lot of things other than " I am an in the field Conservation Officer". We had a guy named Steve Kerrigan who WAS in law enforcement, when he held a gun to buddies head and told him to get off his dirt bike or he was a dead man. Then he put him on his knees and told him he should kill him for terrorizing his wife, "last weekend". He turned out to be an ex- Secret Service agent, run out of Washington for being nuttier than a Stuckey's Pecan Log. You know what his Law Enforcement role was around here?, it was to do background checks on Federal employees, he had no jurisdiction in the woods, at all. He was fired, lost his pension and now he does the same job in the ND oil patch. You see, many cops have an over-inflated view of their own importance. Did you ask the guy what he meant by "being in law enforcement"? Of course not, you took his word for gold 'cause he told you too. When someone says "take it from me", you know a line of BS is coming.

You can say it was an accident, and if you self-report, they can consider that, along with other pertinent facts. If you shoot a hen and don't report it, and they are watching, or perhaps the lodge you are staying at is being investigated, (they may have State investigators hunting right next to you), they cannot discern your intent. In that case, you are not only going to be fined, you will likely lose your SD hunting privileges.

I can show you a spot, just South of I-90 where the local CO has a hay bale blind setup to see in all directions, for miles, just happens there are several pay hunt operations within his view. So don't say it can't happen, they have killer surveillance resources.

But don't "take it from me", just call any SD conservation officer and ask him/her the same question I did.

My question verbatim was: "We know it is illegal to possess a hen pheasant, but what if, by accident a hen is killed? What is the proper protocol"?

I know you won't because you want to believe you can get away with poor judgement in the field.

I posted his text message reply on another thread. If you think it is legal to shoot hens and leave them lie, I can't help you any further.
Click to expand...

Last I heard on the subject you would turn yourself in but not remove the bird from the field. You minding posting the CO'S response. I can't go back through that again.
I think your best course of action would be to feed the evidence to Carptom's dog.
 
ranchodeluxe said:
...you see, many cops have an over-inflated view of their own importance. Did you ask the guy what he meant by "being in law enforcement"? Of course not, you took his word for gold 'cause he told you too.

...You can say it was an accident, and if you self-report, they can consider that, along with other pertinent facts. If you shoot a hen and don't report it, and they are watching, or perhaps the lodge you are staying at is being investigated, (they may have State investigators hunting right next to you), they cannot discern your intent. In that case, you are not only going to be fined, you will likely lose your SD hunting privileges.
Click to expand...

do you make room for the possibility that, just like cops, just as many conservation officers have "an over-inflated view of their own importance." It seems you don't, and took the CO's "word for gold 'cause he told you too." perhaps you've known the guy your entire life and know for a fact he is the leading expert on SD game laws and regulations, i don't know.

whether you are willing to agree with me that just as many conservation officers have "an over-inflated view of their own importance, you and I both know that there are bad apples in every bunch who will abuse their position of trust and authority under color of law, so why take your chance on calling in to one of those CO's with an over-inflated view of their own importance?

further research into the statutes suggest that the penalty for either (1) killing a hen pheasant in south dakota, or (2) possessing a hen pheasant in South Dakota, is a strict liability class 2 misdemeanor, which does not require "intent" and does provide for a fine of up to $500 and 30 days in jail. If the laws of South Dakota also provide for a penalty of the loss of hunting privileges, as you say, wouldn't it be more ethical to send in the maximum fine, report to the county jail for a 30 days stayl, and refrain from hunting for whatever time the prescribed loss of hunting privileges is?

lets be honest, there's no such thing as accidentally killing a hen, just like there's no such then as accidentally getting pregnant. if you know that the "accidental" shooting of a hen is technically a violation of south dakota's game laws, of which the shooter is absolutely guilty, why would an ethical hunter such as yourself submit to the whims of a conservation officer. isn't the "right thing to do" pay the fine, forfeit your hunting privileges, sit in jail for a month, and if SD has civil forfeiture statutes, surrender your vehicle and firearm?

are you just "minimally ethical" (willing to only pay the minimum fine for the accidental killing of a hen), or are you beyond ethical reproach and would voluntarily submit to the maximum penalty provided by the statutes?

rather than answering that question, you are probably asking yourself, "who the hell is this jack-leg on the internet questioning my ethics or morals?"

just so I am clear, i believe, and have always believed, that it is a violation of SD law to kill a hen pheasant. however, i have recently learned, based on the SD Supreme Court Opinion State v. Moschell, "one who would leave a hen pheasant in a field, in compliance with the law, cannot be said to have carelessly or thoughtlessly misspent that pheasant. Under such circumstances, a citizen would be obeying the laws of the State."

personally, i believe that the ethical thing to do is to not shoot hen pheasants, but if you make a mistake, it is ethical to obey the law, and leave it in the field.
 
Last edited:
The author of this thread wanted to discuss disposing of wild game parts in the field, not what to do if you accidentally shot a hen.

Out of respect for the author and the others who have posted here---who are involved in a conversation related to the topic of the thread---Please get back to the topic.
 
I burn and recycle. No trash service. I dump carcasses along gravel roads. Never the same place twice so not to draw predators to one spot. Never on land I hunt.
 
Another angle here is that the bigger the group of hunters the more likely it will have knuckleheads in it.

I apologize on behalf of all other Kansas hunters.
 
I believe one should make a reasonable effort to collect as much meat from the birds / game animal as possible and then consume (you, family, neighbors, friends, domestic animals) what is killed.

That said, if wardens are looking in trash to determine if game is fully used, there are too many wardens.

Get out there and make your presence known, checking bags, guns, licenses. Their known presence in an area can act as a deterrent. They should be immediately available when TIP calls are initiated. Spend time investigate over limits, poaching, etc... Focus efforts on large scale outfitters where the amount of game killed and process can be high.
 
70worm said:
Trespassing pisses me off more than anything! I deal with it all the time at my Grandpa's house(in the ghetto). And sometimes in my driveway(kinda in the country & I have 2 driveways). I always ask the same thing,"why are you in my driveway?". And I always get the same answer "I didn't know". Then I always say "what do you mean you didn't know, do you remember buying this house, did you pay cash?" There are 2 types of property in the country, private & government. If your a hunter then you know where the "public" land is, and everything else is not yours unless you paid for it.
Click to expand...

Is it OK to use your driveway to turn around?
 
Not everyone is pro hunting. Think of the fun someone could have with a go fund me account, or a Facebook er who decided to flip a few breasted pheasants over.

Screenshot_20161103-162151.png
 
David0311

BRITTMAN said:
I believe one should make a reasonable effort to collect as much meat from the birds / game animal as possible and then consume (you, family, neighbors, friends, domestic animals) what is killed.

That said, if wardens are looking in trash to determine if game is fully used, there are too many wardens.

Get out there and make your presence known, checking bags, guns, licenses. Their known presence in an area can act as a deterrent. They should be immediately available when TIP calls are initiated. Spend time investigate over limits, poaching, etc... Focus efforts on large scale outfitters where the amount of game killed and process can be high.
Click to expand...

TIP--calls are a valuable source-no question or argument there--however take in to consideration the area a warden has to cover--it's not possible to immediately respond to all--along with distance other situations may have the officer tied up--and not all tip calls are valid violations--

While there known presence (the wardens) can be of benefit to keep some on there best behavior when their presence is known

Not knowing if they are present or not can help keep a lot more on their best behavior :rolleyes: JMO
 
jmac said:
LOL what is the problem the night crew will clean up the mess in no time. trass and spent shells would piss me off way more than pheasant guts. I as a land owner would never be pissed at this. Hell the skunks and others woulg clean it up pdq.
Click to expand...

I can't see looking at it any other way. I can see not dumping them in a driveway,parking areas,or by a gate but out in the field? Give me a break they'll be gone. Do you guys not gut your deer in the field?
 
wisturkeyhunter said:
I can't see looking at it any other way. I can see not dumping them in a driveway,parking areas,or by a gate but out in the field? Give me a break they'll be gone. Do you guys not gut your deer in the field?
Click to expand...

We came out of a walk-in in SD Sunday, the same rotten carcasses were laying by the gate that were there last week. Coyotes and scavengers will clean up the gut pile but won't eat feathers, spurs, beaks, etc, unless they are starving, right now, they aren't. Big difference between feathers and deer guts. When you have a yummy liver, or kidneys, lungs, etc, they won't last long. I came across a lion kill a couple weeks ago, of a whitetail fawn, same route the dogs run every day, so I knew it was killed within the last 24 hours. All that was left was spine, leg bones and the stomach. The stomach was still laying there this morning., smelling wonderful, everything else is long since scavenged.
It is perfectly legal to dump your deer carcasses on the National Forest, but every year I see them dumped at the trailheads that hikers, bicyclists, and other granola-crunching types use. As someone mentioned above, "not everyone is pro-hunting" The bicyclists that use my access road love to hate anything/anybody who doesn't think as they do, which is that the only valid use for public land is that which they find value in. Very little tolerance for off-roaders, hunters, etc. I can't see how making them wade in deer carcasses while loading/unloading will make them any more tolerant. Same conclusion can be drawn with bird litter.
 
Yeah and the conclusion I come to is people are petty. Both the landowner that won't let a "friend" hunt his property because of what someone else did or the nature lover that only wants to see the woods through rose colored glasses while listening to a Disney soundtrack.
 
wisturkeyhunter said:
Yeah and the conclusion I come to is people are petty. Both the landowner that won't let a "friend" hunt his property because of what someone else did or the nature lover that only wants to see the woods through rose colored glasses while listening to a Disney soundtrack.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. I guess at-least the rancher owns his land, or at a minimum pays to use it. You'd swear the granola crunchers are holding title on the National Forest. My neighbor owns a land-locked section of Black Hills land worth millions. He runs cows on it and let's anyone who wants to camp, motorcycle ride, hike,etc. A while back while waiting for my dogs to get out of his stock tank, some bicyclists stopped-by, conversation started nice enough until one pointed at my Honda xr200 and the ruts in the trail, and associated one with the other. I pointed out to him that if he knew his history, those are wagon ruts from the 1874 Custer Expedition and assured him that I didn't ride in with ole Goldylocks. In-fact my uncle was quoted as telling the good General, when asked to guide him into SE Montana "I advised the General that I did not wish to pursue Sitting Bull, my friend, a kindly and intelligent man". I wonder how the rest of that conversation went?
 
For sure and obviously the rancher/landowner can and should do whatever he wants with his land.

The non hunting crowd can get a voice on public land when they start paying the bills.
 
wisturkeyhunter said:
For sure and obviously the rancher/landowner can and should do whatever he wants with his land.

The non hunting crowd can get a voice on public land when they start paying the bills.
Click to expand...

I have to buy a $28/per vehicle off road sticker to run my bikes, they pay nothing. Guess who fixes the access road when it washes-out? That's right, the hillbilly with the tractor that they love so much to hate. And the Forest Service would write me up if they caught me doing it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top