Anonymous poacher taunts Idaho wildlife agents from Everett?

We have the same tags, we have a nursery and landscape business. We shoot most deer because they destroy shrubs and trees we sell.

My neighbor sells veggies at the farmers market, he shoots every deer, the difference between us is that he doesnt have the tags, technically he poached the deer, but the concept is the same, same with opossums, raccoons, etc
 
Originally Posted By: Irish_80I also think this is someone just trying to stir the pot.

So is poaching wrong if the animal is taken out of season to feed someones family? Not for sport but out of necessity. This is an honest question, not trying to start any fights just curious about what you guys think. The law says it's wrong, I don't agree.

if it is 100% legit and i mean 100% these people have lost their housing, they have a very low amount of money coming in each month, they are living out of a tent/car/bridge/old shack then i dont think i would have an issue but i mean it better be 100% legitimate and they better use every edible piece of meat.
 
OK, I'll stir the pot a little. To me if it comes down to survival OR making sure your family goes to bed with food in their stomachs and that your kids don't go hungry then under those circumstances I have no problem with it. Other than that poaching is stealing.
Funny, let some guy poach an animal and EVERYONE wants him tarred, feathered, castrated and put away. Yet people like Charlie Wrangle and Tim Geithner and others can fudge or not pay their taxes, basically steal from all of us, and that's OK with roughly 50% of the population? 100% of folks would put away a game thief yet only 50% would put away a tax cheat. Anyone see the irony here?
 
Last edited:
When it comes down to survival of a man and his family, there are legitimate avenues for him to pursue... Local food banks, churches, etc.,, before resorting to "poaching"....

Many years ago, I was working security for Kroger in Kansas City and the auto assembly plants were out on strike due to not having a contract... we started catching a few family members stealing groceries and found out that they didn't qualify for most of their benefits.. We set up charge accounts for specific "Food" items until they went back to work to obviate the need to steal... to my knowledge, we never lost a penny from non payment...

If all other avenues are closed to a person and poaching is the only way of providing meat on the table, then I can understand it...
 
+2 cb, thats the issue I was kinda bringing up, but I didnt know how to put it into words, Regardless of where you stand, there seems to me to be tons bigger issues in the world,
 
+3 CB, world is way out of kilter.
My thoughts:
The biggest waste in this whole case is if they do call in "the big boys" and spend an outrageous some of money on forensics to catch some poacher who is embarrasing the local G&F.
Making the catching of a poacher as important or on the same plane as catching a criminal who injures/kills etc humans is the same thing the animal rights people do, i.e. the animal is just as important as a person.

Another thought of mine is this: why in the world the people in the western states tolerate some of the laws they have is beyond me, regarding access to game. It is already mentioned in this thread and decided by the courts that the wildlife is a publicly-owned (managed by the state) resource. To tolerate a handful of people controlling access via fat wallets is rediculous to me considering several of these states have the population dynamics to change this if they so desired.

And finally, I am not for poaching, but I would also not be offended if a hungry man, laid off from work, bills to pay, etc. went out back and shot a doe and or little buck to feed the family. And he doesn't need to sell the house and truck first either. His needs are above those of someone who wants to kill it for the thrill. Now I certainly understand a difference if someone "poaches" the local monster buck and claims family needs, but I'm just saying.
 
Ok I have another question kind of along the lines of poaching. I was reading in either field and stream of outdoor life about some younger guys who got caught shooting deer and leaving them. Well when they caught them they were charged with thrill killing and they were going to have to go through a physiological evaluation to make sure they were stable. The way I took it they basically thought they all could be serial killers in the making. Well I think that is a bunch of BS but anyway, why is killing a deer for the sport any different then a coyote, prairie dog, ground hog or crow? I'm not saying legally because I understand the legal part of it, I'm saying why in the world is one animal more important then another. I think anymore the reason is because it is such a big money making opportunity for states and businesses. Now I don't agree with poaching for the fun of it and I don't do it, but I sure don't agree that government goats being shot means you are a killer in the making. What is your take on this, is a deers life more valuable then a coyote, crow or any other animal.


Edit: I understand there has to be regulation and I have no problem with that. I just wanted to make sure it's clear that I was more asking about the idea that these guys were dangerous because it was deer they shot.
 
Last edited:
Nailed it on the head IRISH..My question is who are we to decide what animal lives and dies, and which ones life is more meaningful.

When you kill you kill. Cockroach to elk, it was a living breathing organisim and you chose to take its life.

Take gorund squirrels for instance, out west you can shoot them with whatever you want, whenever you want, and as many as you want. But take a squirrel around here, there is a season, and If i leave them lay its called waste. I dont get it?
 
WOW! so many different directions in one night.

POACHING TO FEED THE FAMILY(just a title, not yelling):

One of the stupidest arguments I have ever heard. There are so many avenues to getting food breaking the law should not even be close to one. Think about the typical poaching case, it usually involves a rifle if not a couple. It involves a vehicle, it involves ammo, etc. All of which could be sold or traded for food. As OT mentioned there are so many ways to get food, there should never be this issue. Now on top of that, if your that bad off, what will breaking the law really do for you? Around here it will typically get you a large fine (less money for food), They will confiscate the weapon (again a loss to your family), Possibly take your truck (hard to get more money without transportation), etc. I have never bought into the Poaching to feed my family. [beeep], Ramen and party pizzas can go a very long way when you mix in food bank items, help from family, need I also mention food stamps, and all the organizatrions that work to provide assistance. Simply put I can not see how it can be justified. Heck Drive around and pick at the fresh road kills. When I was younger we were very bad off. My dad contacted the state patrol, Division of wildlife, and County Sherrifs Office. Explained the situation. 2 days later we had a 3 elk that had been hit. Yes there was meat we could not use, but at the same time each elk had atleast one 1/4 that was untouched. There are just ot many other options.


I will later share my opinions on the difference between game animals and nusiance species and later...

 
Last edited:
Elks I wasn't trying to get you fired up but I see that I have offended. I am sorry I posted a "stupid argument". I guess I didn't realize that everyone in the country lived close to a food bank, and had the means to drive there and get said food. In my state it is illegal to pick up road kill without written permission, I would guess that the meat would spoil before your letter was received. So that argument is breaking the law as well if you don't follow all of the rules to a t which means the roadkill would be spoiled or eaten by predators/scavengers. I wasn't condoning poaching just a simple open ended question for people to share their thoughts on. Sell a gun for a few hundred dollars and that buys food for awhile yes, but that same gun can keep you fed for a lot longer. "Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day. Teach a man to fish and he will eat for a lifetime.”

Before you get into game animals and nuisance animals I wasn't asking about the legal part of it. I was more asking about the fact that they were trying to label the guys that poached as possibly unstable because they shot deer. I under stand the difference between the two. So again I apologize for asking a couple questions that I guess were a little controversial. I do appreciate your input and I understand your point of view.
 
A lot of different thought here. But I don't think this guy was poaching to feed the family. If he was he surely wouldn't be driving several hundred miles away to do it when there are plenty of game a lot closer. The guy evidently has the resourses for the hunting trips. What do you figure is his motive?
 
No I for sure don't think this guy is doing it for a good reason that's for sure. If I was going to guess, it's some guy that is mad at the state for one reason or another. Maybe he got in trouble before or didn't draw a tag that he thought he deserved so now he's doing this. How do they know it's even real? He could have saved pictures from hunts in the past and sent them to get them all worked up. A lot of dumb people out there do some stupid things just for the S%#t and giggles of it. Yeah sorry for hijacking the thread earlier.
 
Originally Posted By: 1happyshooter

And finally, I am not for poaching, but I would also not be offended if a hungry man, laid off from work, bills to pay, etc. went out back and shot a doe and or little buck to feed the family. And he doesn't need to sell the house and truck first either. His needs are above those of someone who wants to kill it for the thrill. Now I certainly understand a difference if someone "poaches" the local monster buck and claims family needs, but I'm just saying.

Well said! My thoughts exactly!
 
Wow. More welfare. I am shocked at the number of responses that want the guy to go stand in a welfare, handout line instead of going to the woods or fields or lake and solving his own problem.
Leave the soup-line and food bank for the guy who already pawned his rifle and fishing pole is what I think.
My guess is the fellow originally in question had a run-in with the local warden in which he felt he didn't get a fair shake. He is now taking back the fine in tag-free installments, plus punitive damages.
Wouldn't be the first time a fellow got a bad deal in court or in the field, etc. I have personally seen it happen in two states. On the flip side, I have also seen G&F bend over backwards to try and make a fair situation. So take your pick. Perhaps if my guess is correct the Idaho Game & Fish should ask for correspondence about the situation and be willing to make amends and offer up a public apology.
Just saying.
 
1hs I'm not sure F&G would be that gracious if it were a case revenge on a previous experience, or just plain greed. They would probably throw a book at a hunter like that.

Feeding your family is another thing. This doesn't sound like a subsistence hunters behavior; not any I have ever met anyway. They don't generally draw attention to themselves nor their activities.

A greenie trying to highlight what bad people hunters are? Possibly.

A nut job po'd at F&G? Very possibly.

IF it is a nut job? They need to be stopped; simple as that.
 
A poacher ain't exactly Charles Manson. I'll just go ahead and get that part out of the way. Ain't sayin it's right, just sayin that it's not electric chair time just yet.

Now, as far as feeding my family... I'll do what I have to do to make sure my family can eat. Legal or not.
 
Originally Posted By: jumprightinitA lot of different thought here. But I don't think this guy was poaching to feed the family. If he was he surely wouldn't be driving several hundred miles away to do it when there are plenty of game a lot closer. The guy evidently has the resourses for the hunting trips.
What do you figure is his motive?

gents,this discussion is going down a faint two track.
this brazen butthead is bragging about his ability to break the law and get away with it......flaunting his ego......he is breaking the law.....he is breaking every aspect of being a sportsman....he is setting a bad example for our young-the next generation of hunters/sportsmen/conservationists/law-bidding citizens....

after all.....we are a nation of laws.
 
Nope... illegal aliens tell tv reporters that they are not going anywhere. People (or whatever you call them) walk the streets with their butts showing because they have their pants sagging. Marijuana is ok. Men kiss men on tv. etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc.... there's a nation of laws, setting good examples for younger ones, and whatever else I missed. I'm not sayin this guy is man of the year, but he's the least of my worries. Not disagreeing with anything said. This is just my point of view.
 
Back
Top