Somebody just shot a doe with a rifle.

[daddyo]

Too bad you didn't have a camera with you.

[DaveS]

I will only warn you of this. Because of my service at the refuges, and the opportunitys I've had to work with the game wardens....be very, very careful when approaching and/or confronting someone caught in the act of poaching. It could go sour in a heart beat. From a safe distance, gain as much information as possible. If you really want to get TWRA's attention? Tell them you think they shot a turkey, duck or pig.....will get there attention quick!

[10-Ring]

I will only warn you of this. Because of my service at the refuges, and the opportunitys I've had to work with the game wardens....be very, very careful when approaching and/or confronting someone caught in the act of poaching. It could go sour in a heart beat. From a safe distance, gain as much information as possible. If you really want to get TWRA's attention? Tell them you think they shot a turkey, duck or pig.....will get there attention quick!

Why would they care about a pig? I know for a fact a blind eye would be turned for poaching pigs around here, they are a nuisance.

[DaveS]

They're protecting those little "oinkers" around here. Shooting one is a big no-no!

[Guest bkelm18]

Personally, although I have a hunting license (despite a repeated lack of success in getting any 'good' out of it) and hunt legally, I feel that hunting as a means to address a real need to feed oneself or one's family is a natural right and - just like self defense - transcends 'legal' or 'illegal'

However we don't live in that world. Our rights are still governed by laws.

[whiskey]

BTW, it is definitely not rifle season, or any firearm season for deer. They were definitely breaking the law. As previously mentioned, if they were close to a residence, they may have broken more laws.

Call during business hours, insist on filing a report.

[JAB]

However we don't live in that world. Our rights are still governed by laws.

So if it becomes illegal to own any firearms, period, you will simply turn all of yours in and feel good about being in compliance with the law? As I said, I believe that some rights transcend laws.

That doesn't mean I believe in wanton waste, taking animals on land that belongs to other people, blasting things indiscriminately or so on.

Edited October 11, 2011 by JAB

[Guest GunTroll]

You have a right to self preservation. You do not have a right to steal an animal from the public in an illegal manner.

What do you have against wanton waste?

[JAB]

You have a right to self preservation. You do not have a right to steal an animal from the public in an illegal manner.

What do you have against wanton waste?

Feeding oneself is self-preservation. Further, animals do not belong to the 'public'. They belong to nature and for millions of years, mankind has taken what they needed to survive from nature. The whole idea that wild animals 'belong' to anyone or any group, in the first place, is wrongheaded. Wild animals are not 'public property' the way a park or a public boat ramp is. I realize that regulations are needed to prevent overhunting/extinction of certain species. Also, as I said earlier, I purchase a hunting and fishing license and obey regulations. However, a hungry person occasionally taking an animal to feed themselves or their families is not wrong, to my mind, no matter how many 'regulations' that person violates in so doing.

[Lumber_Jack]

I I'm starving and I have bullets I'm gonna go kill something and ear it. However these guys clearly had a car and a gun, so they could have easily chosen a more discreet location if they truly were "just hungry". Plus if you have to break the law to survive, so be it, but don't be mad at me if I report you. Plus you get 3 squares a day in jail.

[JAB]

I I'm starving and I have bullets I'm gonna go kill something and ear it. However these guys clearly had a car and a gun, so they could have easily chosen a more discreet location if they truly were "just hungry". Plus if you have to break the law to survive, so be it, but don't be mad at me if I report you. Plus you get 3 squares a day in jail.

Oh, I completely agree that the jackholes discussed in the OP were totally out of line (I think I said that in my first post but it probably got lost in my more 'controversial' comments.) Those guys were discharging a firearm near a public roadway and close to at least one residential area in a place where they most likely couldn't be sure of what lay beyond their target. In so doing, they were endangering the lives of others who posed no threat of harm to them and there is no right - natural or otherwise - to do that.

I also agree that someone in a 'need game for survival' situation should be more discreet. Heck, I'd even go so far as to say that doing so on someone else's private land, without permission, is different in that it involves illegally trespassing. I also do not mean to imply that it would be justifiable to take, say, another person's domestic pig or cow, etc. because in so doing, you are taking something that belongs to someone else (unlike my view that wild animals belong to no one and no group of people, including 'the public' at large.) Also, I do not see shooting an endangered or threatened species as 'justifiable' when there are plenty of non-endangered, non-threatened animals that can provide food. I don't want to give the impression that I am saying that anyone should be able to shoot anything, any time, anywhere. Further, I am talking only about situations when a person is taking the animal for food. I have said that I believe that wild animals belong to nature and that it is a natural right to take what we need from nature to survive. I can no more see telling a hungry man that he can't take a deer than I can see telling that to a hungry bear, wolf or any other carnivore. However, I also feel it is our natural duty to respect that relationship by not wasting that which nature provides. Killing an animal just for the heck of it and not using the meat (as in wanton waste), to me, disrespects nature which to me, in this case, is a much more grievous act than violating 'game' laws. I am simply stating my personal belief that the need to eat to survive transcends 'poaching' laws. As you put it, "I'm starving and I have bullets, I'm going to go kill something and eat it." Thankfully, I am not in such a position but I do sympathize with those who may be - and I also believe that many more of us may have to rethink our positions on the matter if the economy continues to go downhill.

As to laws vs. rights, etc. there is a quote from Thomas Jefferson that possibly does a better job than I explaining what I mean:

"Of liberty I would say that, in the whole plenitude of its extent, it is unobstructed action according to our will. But rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add 'within the limits of the law,' because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the right of an individual." --Thomas Jefferson to I. Tiffany, 1819.

Edited October 13, 2011 by JAB

[Guest GunTroll]

The wild game animals do indeed belong to the public. All of the public. You, I, and every other neighbor we have within the state and beyond our man made state borders. They belong to us all. When you do not afford me the same opportunity to harvest the query ( IE out of season, illegal area, illegal equipment, etc) you are stealing from me. And by me I mean us all. Game animals belong to nature, but then again so do we (perhaps for the sake of argument here) and since we are at the top, we set the rules. Rules are law that we allow. Don't like em...change em. Don't put gun rights in here for this topic as you did before, we are talking hunting or better yet, poaching.

If these guys had a car, a gun, and free time to break laws, I'd suggest they go get a job and contribute to, not take from the greater whole. If no job can be found. Start a business. If you can't do that, go to the GOV tit and I'll be chipping in to feed you and yours. I'd also suggest they sell the equipment they used to steal a game animal from us all to buy food that they need.

I give no one a pass for breaking laws. I do from time to time encourage civil protest for rights being violated ( look at my thread/comment history) but I can't argue for this scenario in any way. I can't beleive we have hunters that advocate, or if thats to strong of a word, turn a blind eye to poaching in any way.

[jimic]

Where can I send my bill for crop damage, by the public owned wild game ?

[Guest GunTroll]

Who owns them then? Or doesn't for the sake of argument.

If your a farmer then you should be all to familiar with GOV assistance via subsidies etc whether you get it or not, you know of it I'm sure. Take advantage if you feel the need to get "free" money for your losses.

This is a dumb argument...poachers have at it. Its your right. Maybe we should have a 'occupy' TWRA protest.

[Wingshooter]

There is a lot of food assistance available (church, friends, local organizations, government, etc.) to people that are really starving and have no food. If someone is working and still does not have money to eat, then some priorities need to be adjusted. If someone is without a job and does not have food, there are lots of jobs out there that pay enough to feed one's belly. Hunger should not be an excuse to break the law. Now, if your lost out in the wilderness like SurvivorMan, then by all means hunt for food. That's my take on it.

[DaveS]

If a deer runs off of PRIVATE property that DOES NOT ALLOW HUNTING....should I pay the bill? Should the PUBLIC? Should the LAND OWNER? If I'm HUNGRY......I will shoot any animal....any day.....any season! I was in a "bad situation" not long ago. I did not qualify for food stamps or any assistance at all. Church was only able to give me a few cans of corn and green beans. I still "Thank God" to this very day for the "Doe" he gave me to feed my family. You do what you have to do! I personaly don't think a person should have to pay for a license to kill a game animal on "PUBLIC LAND". After all....doesn't "PUBLIC LAND" belong to us? Shouldn't "land owner exemption" come into play? I feel bad for taking a doe to feed my family in hard times....but I would do it again in a heart beat!

Edited October 13, 2011 by wd-40

[roverboy]

I feel for you WD. Its tough sometimes. I got laid off in Jan. 2010 and was off a long time and put in a lot of applications with not much luck. I finally got called back and after 90 days I'm laid off again............

[Guest GunTroll]

Sounds like some of you think you deserve more than you are getting. Fans of the crowds "occupying" our cities? You want what YOU seem is yours with little concern for others stake in the same item (public game animals in this case). Hold your heads in shame and continue to opine about hunter/hunting morals or ethics when you yourself do not follow the rules yourself.

Unbelievable. SME's and fellow TGO hunters alike promoting/accepting/participating/turning a blind eye to, the illegal harvesting of game animals that belong to ALL OF US, AND NOT TO ANY ONE MAN ALONE. Selfish.

[Guest adamoxtwo]

If it was between watching my children starve and me harvesting a Deer out of season....well I'm guilty. I would take the deer. However, and I can't stress this enough, it would only be at a last resort.

[DaveS]

Deer was in season at the time. I didn't have the money for a type 94 permit. If I did, I could have bought some chicken or something. Times past......

How many deers do we see laying on the road dead? How many hogs are shot by our Government and left laying dead to rot? Is this not STEALING animals from the public? How about our OWN GOVERNMENT turning people away...yet leave thousands of pounds of meat in the field?

I don't poach....I feed.....I don't condone poaching (most is done for racks)....I do however think a man has a responsibilty to feed his family. And when civic organizations, food stamps and goverment programs fail because of funding....well then what's left?

A man takes a doe and all hell wan'ts to bust loose on him! How about the person who takes ducks and throws them on the sied of the road? STEALING ? AN EXTRA FISH OR TWO? STEALING? BLOWING LITTLE ANIMALS UP AND LEAVING THEM? STEALING?

By all means report poaching. What I am saying....be careful. Think why he might be doing it. The likelyhood of TWRA spending the money to go after a 60 or so pound doe is pretty unlikely!

[whiskey]

I would be for a permit issued by TWRA to qualifying families that allowed taking a deer anytime of year, X number of deer per permit, to feed a hungry family. However, there currently is no such permit, so taking a deer outside of season/rules, is still poaching. I would also like to see TWRA start a roadkill program. In Alaska, you put your name on a list and when a Moose is hit by a car, the state troopers call you and you have to go then and get the deer. Why couldn't the TWRA have a call list for each county and offer roadkill deer to individuals that need/want food.

Is there a difference between poaching and stealing? Would stealing steaks from Wal-mart be different than poaching a deer? Both are expressly illegal. Sure, our surrounding counties have an abundance of deer, especially does, but that has only been achieved through seasons and bag limits. It's easy for me to make excuses about why I speed, but in the end I am just breaking the law. If I believed that the person that shot this doe was hungry, I might could by into the sympathy for the hungry debate, but there is a much great chance that these two were just too lazy to archery hunt, too lazy to get up before daylight, too lazy to drive to a public hunting area, and took advantage of an easy opportunity. I do believe they will eat the deer, but not that they needed it to feed their family. With the price of gas and bullets, they would be better off to buy Ramen Noodles.

I have broken game laws in years past, so I am not judging anyone. However, I hope everyone that poaches a deer is caught and convicted by the TWRA.

[10-Ring]

This is turning into a sticky discussion, although everyone is good intentioned. I think I would support legislation allowing for a reduced cost hunting license based on income, lets face it, although not as expensive as some states, it's getting downright expensive to hunt in TN. A person can buy quite a bit of food for what a license costs, just as WD-40 was saying. Someone compared poaching to stealing steaks from Walmart. I worked loss prevention for six years at a couple of different stores including Walmart. I was always dreading catching someone stealing because they really were hungry. I dreaded it because I knew I would have to prosecute them and it wasn't my call to make. Fortunately that never happened. I have caught people stealing steaks because they were hungry but I wasn't very sympathetic to that because I wasn't making enough to buy steaks then. If it was bread and peanut butter I would have really have had a hard time with that. I have had people tell me they were stealing DVD's because they were hungry, I tried to explain to them that DVD's are not edible.

[JAB]

The wild game animals do indeed belong to the public.

No, they don't. No more than do the clouds in the sky. Obviously this is a difference in philosophy between us and the reason we will never agree on this issue.

Don't put gun rights in here for this topic as you did before, we are talking hunting or better yet, poaching.

Comparing the issue of a person taking a game animal out of season due to a real need with noncompliance with a possible law prohibiting gun ownership is apropos. Simply because you have no good rebuttal does not mean the argument does not belong here. Both issues deal with natural rights (hunting to feed oneself or family is every bit as much a natural right as self defense.) Most here would not simply 'go along' with a law requiring they surrender all of their firearms. In so doing, they would be no less in violation of the apparently holy and vaunted 'law' as someone who takes a deer out of season to put food on the table. Both have to do with self preservation and natural rights. To condemn one while knowing that you would do the other is, frankly, more than a little hypocritical. If you wish to boil everything down to the point that the law should be followed unquestionably then you cannot pretend to hold the moral high ground while leaving an 'out' for a situation - such as a law requiring that you surrender any and all firearms - in which you would not follow the law.

Hold your heads in shame and continue to opine about hunter/hunting morals or ethics when you yourself do not follow the rules yourself.

Legal and illegal do not, necessarily, equate with moral and immoral or ethical and unethical. Morals have to do with right or wrong. Laws sometimes run along moral lines, true, but many laws have nothing to do with 'right' or 'wrong' and simply determine 'legal' or 'illegal'. Those things are not, necessarily, the same and can even, sometimes, be in opposition.

Would stealing steaks from Wal-mart be different than poaching a deer?

Yes because, again, wild animals do not belong to anyone - not the 'public', not the government and not Walmart. Those steaks, however, are the property of Walmart until and unless they are purchased, etc. The two situations are not the same, in the least.

Edited October 14, 2011 by JAB

[Guest pfries]

They poached, small game was legally available.

I could concede to them not being able to afford a permit, however squirrel season was and is open. We just had a big meal of stuffed and roasted squirrel the other night. As far as the cost of a permit I do not know I have fallen under the land owner exemption since I moved to where I am at.

[MrDigitaL]

If they would of used a bow that would of been fine. I just don't like the fact they used a rifle that close to my house. There are several kids that play around there. I called the TWRA yesterday and they said absolutely no rifles are allowed in that area.