Hunter fires one shot gets 2 caribou.

I really don't think Art was suggesting this but stating that legal action in this case will make it more likely that people will do it in the future.

You apparently ignored the part of my post where I clearly stated "assuming no other laws were broken". Pretty much everyone with a drivers license knows that pedestrians have the right of way but that doesn't mean they have the right to step out into oncoming traffic. Many pedestrian injuries occur when the pedestrian is at fault and the driver is not charged.

I really dislike it when people take The High Road, quote a portion of what someone writes and ignore the parts that don't fit their agenda, and then try to imply that others are less ethical than they should be. I have people prosecuted nearly every year for breaking game laws on my property so I understand people often have wanton disregard for game laws. I also do not prosecute people that I feel were truly trying to do the right thing but wound up on my property through honest mistake. That happens every couple of years.

 

Alaska courts make allowances for people to appear by phone if appearing in person creates a hardship.

 

I really don't think he was either....but the way it reads it could be taken that way. Again, condoning something as "okay to do" or "the better of two evils" validates that response to many folks, especially when it comes from folks in authority or respect. My peeve is that I see here all to often folks suggesting the "SSS" practice or the "this rule reg is stupid so it shouldn't apply here". The reality is, when folks purchase a hunting license, they are agreeing to play/hunt by the rules. Don't like the rules and/or the consequences of breaking them, stay home and watch hunting shows on TV.

No, I didn't miss the part of "no other laws", just as I didn't miss the part "you will normally be okay". My point was, right or wrong, that even if a law was broken, the right thing to do is to stop, render aid and call 911. Even if there's even the slightest chance of getting ticketed. Again, we do not know what punishment, if any, the Alaska F&G is going to hand out. Yet folks are suggesting/condoning not calling this type of thing in and thus participating in a more flagrant violation of Wanton Waste outta fear of being charged with a much lesser crime.

Again, I help teach Hunter Safety. We have a warden that comes in one night to every class and this same scenario comes up every time. When all is said and done, the fines/punishment for any violation are much less, if any, when the violation occurred unintentionally and is reported immediately by the person who committed it. The worst fines and punishments come to those that get caught after committing a violation, even unintentionally, and walk away.....especially if there is game being left to rot. Folks do not realize how hard DNR/F&G agencies work at catching violators or how successful they are at it. They also do not know the resources those folks have for solving those crimes. So the hunter gets a $200 fine and a slap on the wrist. That is pretty much pocket change considering the cost of the trip, out of state licenses and guide service. I wonder what would have happened if he left the meat to rot as many are suggesting here and then got caught? Walking away and letting a large amount of meat rot outta fear you may have to pay a small fine is unethical. Period. Suggesting to others to do it is unethical. Period. No argument about it.

 

Hey buck...reading comprehension is crucial, especially if you're going to take someone to task for what you (whoops!) mistakenly thought they said.

Art said, "the lesson taught is that ...," not "what 'chall autta do is..."

This IS the lesson taught, inadvertently or not. "SSS," as you said. Self report and you'll be treated harshly. Don't report and you'll probably get away with it. That's not a GOOD lesson for society to be teaching ourselves, but it is the lesson delivered in strong language by situations like this.

Now, courts have the ability to be pretty understanding about self-reported errors and can often find ways of satisfying the law without unduly punishing the well-meaning victim of circumstance and bad luck. It is unfortunate that the hassles of travel back up to deal with the court are pretty severe on their own for this guy, but the court will likely consider that in making a final judgment.

 

Comprehension is not just the understanding of meanings of written words, but where the writer of those words is coming from and where he is trying to lead the reader. This is what is meant by "reading between the lines". As I said, I doubt if Art was telling folks directly to break the law, but by condoning SSS in these scenarios as opposed to castigating the idea, to many it would appear as acceptable. This is something I see quite often here at THR, folks minimizing the ideals behind game regs and accepting quite readily the idea of breaking them. The High Road is that there is never a justifiable reason to break game regs unless it is life or death. Being a mistake does not make it right or go away.

no he said "the lesson taught is that if you goof up, stay quiet and don't be mistakenly honest. To some, me included, that means exactly what it says, if you goof up, SSS.

There has been no ruling on this case yet or any fines or penalties given. To say the punishment was harsh is completely untrue since there has been no punishment yet. It will be interesting to see what comes about. As I said in a previous post, Alaska lets non-residents appear by phone so they do not have to travel back. Again, regardless of the outcome, the hunter did do the right and ethical thing. But.......since he was hunting in Alaska and odds are he was using a guide, he may not have been alone and did not really have a choice, since he may have been endangering others to prosecution also if they did not report it.

 

The one time I dropped two deer by accident I luckily had a A and B tag for another doe. Tagged up both deer, no problem. Was a little annoyed I burned my A tag on a doe, but no big deal. The second deer was even considerate enough to run 50 yards out onto the farm road before dying.

 

I'm not sure how much discretion the officer even had.

 

Re-reading my post, I don't see even a hint of condoning anything nor of suggesting any sort of action of any sort whatsoever.

I was merely pointing out a common reaction by numerous people who learn vicariously from the tribulations of others. In a similar situation, they will seek to avoid placing themselves into jeopardy. That little aspect of human nature is a bunch older than I am.

 

15 or 20 years back, a lawyer was hunting down at Aransas in the fog. He mistook a whooping crane for a goose and shot it. He turned himself in. He lost his law license and spent a year in prison.......whadda moron. Yeah, be honest, but hey, over a friggin' bird that ain't got a chance, anyway? I'm as much a conservationist as the next guy, but they've wasted BILLIONS trying to keep one group of those things viable. It's a lost cause and I wouldn't give up my life over one mistakenly shot. Heck, I'd probably find out what it tastes like. LOL! Why waste the meat? I know sandhill is some good stuff.

Hey, but on the up side, he WAS a lawyer.

 

Driving home today in a 65 mph speed zone. Glanced down at speedometer and was doing 71. Oh crap! Let off accelerator and set cruise control on 63. No, I didn't drive on down to the police station and turn myself in. We all make these choices. Use some common sense.

 

I don't see what the big deal is. He reported and got a citation. I'm sure it will be something minimal based on the fact he did the right thing. this person will be fine.

 

Many years ago I had a buddy on a dove shoot who was brand new to hunting (come to think of it it's the same guy that killed two deer in one day that I mentioned in an earlier post). He was on the far side of a 20 acre field and came across the field holding up the bird he just shot for the game warden to identify. It was a Killdeer! Cost him a couple of hundred bucks. I promise that if I ever accidentally shoot a killdeer I will not carry it over to the warden.

 

They went from 15 birds to around 300 now a days.

yet a lot of people do...... (Not just hunting)

 

Hmm. Worrying about whoopers sorta says that this thread is about done.

 

Hmmmmmm, but they taste just like chicken!

 

Do the best you can and if stuff happens, right or wrong, decide if the fine is worth fighting or not (and if not pay it, get on with your life).

The cost of financial outlay is usually the cheapest part of the penalty. The disruption and upset often many times worse.

Some people confuse legal with ethical.

A few also think one has to be guilty to get a ticket.

The system is padded, when its misdemeanor stuff.......the noble fight often not worth the hassle or cost.

One guy near me spent over 10K to fight a ticket many years ago. Took about 2 yrs and he won.

Some games IMHO are not worth playing.

 

300 birds a viable breeding population does not make and it's taken 'em a century and a huge fortune to get that! I wouldn't go to prison over one should I mistakenly shoot one, but then, I do know the difference in a friggin' snow goose and a crane, so maybe he spent a year in prison on multiple counts of stupidity. But, I just think a man's life and career is worth more than a bird, especially since he turned himself in. Probation for a year, perhaps, but PRISON? Actually, I should think a stiff fine would be enough.

And, if bird watchers wanna pay for these birds, I'd be happy to see them off the hunter's tax burden. It's a total waste of resources. JMHO

 

IMHO, while Killdeer are annoying, they are impossible to mistake for a dove.

Ticket was just.

Either somebody had never seen a mourning dove before or was blind.
A fine for gross lack of target ID would be legit.

 

Yes, and sometimes the two are at odds with each other.

I hunt whitetails in an area where a buck must have at least 4 points on one side to be legal. Except for kids 16 and under who can shoot any buck.

In the years since that point restriction was put in place, I have had to let two wounded bucks walk (hobble) past my stand - one missing a leg and the other gut shot - because it would not have been legal for me to shoot either one. In both cases, I still had my buck tag and would have shot the wounded animal if not for the point restrictions in place.

I know some people would not have been bothered by this - after all, coyotes have to eat too - but it was a case for me where following the law was a violation of my personal sense of ethics.

 

Know your target and backstop and what's beyond. Basic hunter safety. The guy made a mistake and will pay for it. If they waived the citation, too many idiots would take two and use the shot through excuse.

IMHO he should get to keep the first animal and surrender the second, pay a fine, and maybe sit out a couple of seasons until he builds his skills and judgment.

 

Lota people sitting on high horses in this thread.

 

When it comes to being legal and ethical, I prefer the high horse folks. You may have noticed I ain't got much time for low horse riders that like to poach and bend the rules as they see fit. I doubt that anyone here doubts the fact that this was an unintentional killing. I also doubt that most folks here think they guy needs to have the book thrown at him. It would do the hunting community and the state of Alaska both more good than harm to give the guy a decent break for being honest and forthcoming and to set an example to others. To me the confiscation of the meat and the loss of the second tag would be sufficient. It will be interesting to see what the state of Alaska thinks. Most of us have had our ethics ingrained on us from parents, role models and peers. The old saying "you are who your friends are" speaks loud and clear. Thing is, once you grow up and leave home, you get a choice of which type horse you ride or the road you take. It's called character.

BTW, how does one edit a post without getting that little message at the bottom?