Poaching: Who does it, and why?

Status
Not open for further replies.
earlthegoat2 said:
I knew of a whole clan (family) who never bought meat from a grocery. They only shot the game around their property whenever they wanted. They would often shine bait piles in the night to increase their chances and lessen the workload. They always used what they shot. Not just the backstraps and haunches either. Every edible part they ate and they used the antlers for the scales of the knives they made and made clothing from the leather after they tanned it. They were not doing it for profit and as far as I could tell they were not doing it for thrills. They never just killed game to kill it. It was just what they did.

Does any of that make any of it OK? Eh, maybe. Maybe not. Does it make it illegal? Absolutely. Some folks decide what laws are right and wrong and those same folks choose to follow those laws or not. Does the sign say STOP or does it say STOPTIONAL?
Click to expand...

It was in every way *BOTH* wrong and illegal if there was anyone in that family capable of buying food rather than poaching it. You only said they didn't ever buy meat....no mention on whether that was a CHOICE or simply a reality they faced...no money to BUY meat. If they are poaching to feed themselves simply because they dont *WANT* to buy the food but have the means...they're despicable game thieves who should be fully prosecuted and held responsible for their actions. You'd think at least one out of then"clan" could hold a real job, and afford to buy groceries. If you have the means to legally feed yourself, and choose instead to poach, you are nothing but a common criminal, and I refuse in any way to romanticize what you do. You're a theif, no different than someone who steals a side of beef from the butcher shop.

Another thing makes me scratch my head....I hear an awful lot about how "its their land, if they need the game, so be it". I know from experience owning land isn't cheap. I don't know how one can afford to pay taxes in their estate, but can't buy groceries to the point crime is justifiable
 
Last edited:
here the states sells so many tags,you can buy all the d-map tags you want and extra doe tags when not sold out, its a money game for them. and the deer heards are down and with this bad winter it will not get better for a few years,the same with turkeys, extra tags if you have the money. when i was a young man you bought one tag for every thing but doe. now you buy a general lic, then a bow, muzzle loader, doe, bear, furtaker. eastbank.
 
You're a thief, no different than someone who steals a side of beef from the butcher shop.
Click to expand...
Yes, a poor country poacher is no different that poor urbanite who steals to eat. Both instances are illegal. I don't believe anyone thinks that poaching is not a crime. In both situations a LEO would do the right thing and either write a citation or haul in the criminal. This does not change the fact that some folks steal to eat.

An older Alabama woman stole some eggs from a local "dollar type'' store to feed her grand babies. That too is illegal. Instead of taking the granny in the officer in charge of the situation purchased the whole carton of eggs for the lady.http://www.al.com/news/birmingham/index.ssf/2014/12/tarrant_police_officer_deliver.html
 
Last edited:
I've never understood why anyone thinks game laws are less serious than other criminal laws. Maybe it's because it's so easy to break game laws and get away with it. Maybe people believe it's not the government's business. We were all taught that obeying manmade laws is the morally correct thing to do. I would drive recklessly by extreme speed if I needed to be somewhere quickly in order to protect a life. I would initiate a assault if someone touched my wife improperly. I would steal under life/death situation. I said before I would poach if I was starving. But I think we're talking here about poaching as a law violation just because we want to. I wish this thread would die, because it's showing too much agreement for wanton disrespect of game animals and the laws protecting them.
 
As far as people needing to poach, that number is probably really low but for those few that need to i see no reason for them to get into trouble or even calling it poaching.
Click to expand...

So, if I lived in a big city, then stealing from someone's home or business because I need money to buy food shouldn't be called stealing?
 
Lots of preaching going on.
ALL of us break/bend laws when we see fit. How many go 65 when the speed limit is 65? How many slam on brakes when the light turns yellow rather than gunning it to make the light? How many maybe fudge a few dollars on their income tax? How many of us drank when we were underage? Or maybe smoked pot when it wasn't legal?
If a person breaks the law then they run the risk of being caught. Whether you are poaching a trophy elk for the mount or a deer to feed your family or trying to get to work on time by speeding a bit, you are taking a risk of being caught. I personally tend to look more favorably on a guy shooting a squirrel out of season in his backyard because it chewed the wires in his car than I do on the guy that shoots an elk illegally to brag to his buddies. Both are illegal. Both are poaching.
I don't think anyone is advocating that people break the law but we realize it happens and, in some cases, we are okay with it. I have done it, you have done it, and if we get caught we pay a price.
One of my buddies got caught hunting over corn in Alabama a few years ago and it cost him over $500. He was stone cold guilty and paid the fine. Another buddy killed a coyote (legally) and threw the carcass on the side of a county road. The game warden saw it and ticketed the guy for some obscure game law. After a couple of phone calls the ticket was torn up. Both guys were breaking the law. I have seen guys get tickets for "disturbing wildlife in their natural habitat" when they shine their headlights across a field. Apparently that is illegal even if you don't have a firearm in the car.
 
Last edited:
I'm told my Dad had the "thief" attitude of poachers until the day a Conservation Officer in White county arrested a man for "driving deer with a motor vehicle" and confiscated the equipment involved.

The vehicle involved was a John Deere combine and the deer being driven where in a corn field the man was harvesting. Supposedly the head of the DNR went to the county to set matters straight. CO's lost a lot of support from agri-business in three counties over that particular incident.

Item last- the state may claim "ownership" of game animals until the cows come home- up until the time the state takes responsibility for the damage to crops their "property" cause that bit about poaching = theft of property is so much of what those cows leave on the floor of the barn.
 
Item last- the state may claim "ownership" of game animals until the cows come home- up until the time the state takes responsibility for the damage to crops their "property" cause that bit about poaching = theft of property is so much of what those cows leave on the floor of the barn.
Click to expand...

Well said , and most of the " Stealing from the people " folks who whine are the same crowd that seem to feel its ok to hunt my property without so much as an attempt to find out who it belongs to and get permission . They sure dont stick around after they shot one of my horses or tractors though .
 
redneckrepairs said:
Well said , and most of the " Stealing from the people " folks who whine are the same crowd that seem to feel its ok to hunt my property without so much as an attempt to find out who it belongs to and get permission . They sure dont stick around after they shot one of my horses or tractors though .
Click to expand...
Out of respect for my father's concern that I hold my temper and Sister Beatrice to temper my language I won't comment on the "hunters" that feel a line fence is just an interesting suggestion and have no idea or concern what is in the line of flight of their rifle ball.

Hopefully you don't have Chicago people that get verbally abusive to you on yours for cutting wood and scaring game out of the woodlots they never bothered to ask permission to hunt in. But that's a story for another time.
 
I guess everyone has taken a game bird or two over his/her limit as in PA in years past, 8 Ringnecks was SUPPOSED to be a seasonal limit.
Turkeys MUST be tagged as do all deer kills.
Once, several years ago, during trapping season, I shot a big doe because I desperetly needed the meat. I had the necessary tag/tags but my law -breaking was a matter of using a .22 pistol to dispatch the animal.
The whole deer was consumed/enjoyed for the last two months that I spent in the "Big Woods"!
 
First off i do not agree with poaching at all except for the 5% that NEED the food.


this commenting on stealing in the city vs. stealing game animals is just apples and oranges. God but game animals on this earth for everyone to eat, period!

i do not agree with poaching at all, hell i do not agree with legal hunting if they do not eat the meat. but if someone is starving or needs food who am I or what is a law made of men to say otherwise. I follow the law to a tee, but if it came down to living and dieing i will only follow the law of the Lord, not of kings.

To take away the right of a man to hunt for his life is the same as taking his right to defend himself. you cannot eat so you die, but you can carry a gun to protect yourself? Come on people.
 
I detest poaching. It is stealing from other hunters. Especially city hunters that have no respect for other hunters, landowners or game laws. They are rude and selfish. I could cite dozens of examples. I also know poor people that live on venison and live in very rural areas. I am against that too, but tend to look the other way. But none of them are starving.
There are also people that drive around and shoot deer and other game on sight. Some sell the meat, some just leave the deer or other game for the coyotes. Then we have immigrants from Asian countries that hunt in large groups that drive deer off private property to theirs the day before season and kill everything they can on anyone's property. I don't think even 1% hunt out of real need. If so fine. Most of them are just pigs.
 
It's ironic to me to see so many people in this thread preaching about how 'all laws should be regarded the same', and how 'all laws must be followed'. I find this ironic because I've noticed for many years now that most people on THR state that they would not follow future gun laws they didn't agree with, and would keep their guns even if they were legally outlawed.

Kind of hypocritical, isn't it?

All laws are not created equally, and morality and legality aren't always in sync with each other. If you disagree, please tell me how the possession of a short barreled rifle (sans tax stamp) is immoral. Illegal, certainly, but not immoral. See the difference?

Most (but certainly not all) game laws have a good and valid reason for their existence. Some game laws go too far, and some game laws weren't well researched, or adjusted for changing situations (like an explosion of the deer population in some areas). This is no different than any other law.

But, by and large I would lump most game laws into the category of "environmental protection" laws. They are designed to preserve and protect an ecosystem, and ensure that it sustains itself for future generations. Other environmental protection laws cover subjects as far ranging as: littering, pollution, camp fires, oil drilling regulations, vehicle emissions laws, noise ordinances, and so on.

Thus, I don't see the taking of an out-of-season deer to feed a hungry family as "theft", despite the multi-decade ad campaign that has tried to convince us otherwise. It is NOT the same as breaking into a butcher's shop to steal meat. In one instance you have a naturally occurring product of nature being harvested for food (as humans have always done), and in the other instance you have something of value being taken from another person without permission.

Again, it is illegal to take that deer outside of the parameters of the law, but it is illegal mostly due to the threat of environmental damage that would occur if we were all taking deer whenever and however we wanted to… it's a law of a different category than the ones that cover armed robbery (as was mentioned earlier in this thread).

Anyway, allow me to provide an example of how two law breakers can be seen differently. Contrast this with the comparison I made earlier between the "trophy poacher" (ex: the guy who shot Samson the elk near Rocky Mountain National Park) and the "survival poacher" (ex: a poor hillbilly who shoots a deer in his woods to feed his family):

Assume that there is a fire ban in a certain wilderness area, due to the area being overused and fuel (wood) being at a minimum. A backpacker is injured during a hike and needs to spend another night out, the weather has been turning colder, and the injured party is at a risk of shock. They make a small fire to keep warm (illegally). In another instance a group of drunken teenagers cut down some trees and make a large bonfire to entertain them during a keg party. Both groups have committed the same law violation (an illegal fire), but are the two violations really proportional when viewed through the eyes of any reasonable adult?

Please don't misunderstand my post, or think that I'm suggesting that game laws should be disregarded. But, understand that it might be a little harsh to label the "survival poacher" as a "common thief", or as "bad as someone who robs a store", etc.


EDITED TO ADD:

In reading a lot of these posts, I get the impression that many of us are thinking of different things when we hear the word "poaching". Some people are thinking of the guy who trespasses on your land in the middle of the night to shoot a deer. Others are thinking of the person who kills a trophy-class animal illegally for bragging rights. Some of us are talking about the people who live mostly off the land, and others are talking about the people who violate season dates to get a jump on other hunters, or some other type of unfair advantage over the rest of the public. Everyone is technically correct, but I'm not sure we're all on the same sheet of music :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top