I am with Scott with this one, I also hunt In Ct and the Game wardens have a zero tolerance policy.Scott Farris said:
Speaking hypothetically:
- Thread starter Carl
- Start date
Mark W
Well-known member
First off, most everyone I know respects the officers and all they have to do. The vast majority of my meetings with the wardens has been nothing but pleasurable.
I have had a couple bad experiences. Once was hunting down on Indian Slough across from Wabasha MN. I was much younger and hunting with my Dad and his buddy. At the time there was no shooting of canvasbacks. As the morning went it and the shooting slowed, we watched a severely injured canvasback swim around the area. It was so hurt it could keep it's head up and was swimming erratically. After almost an hour of watching the injured bird, my Dad explained he was going to shoot it and leave it in the weeds for the animals to eat. He said while it is illegal, the ethical thing was to shoot the bird and end it's misery.
After shooting the bird, retrieving it and putting it in the weeds (not hiding it in the weeds) we saw the local CO coming across the marsh right towards us. He had been watching us on the scope and saw us shoot the bird. He wasn't sure it it was a redhead or a canvasback. We told him the truth and explained why the bird was shot. He didn't care, illegal is illegal. Took us back to the landing where other CO's were waiting for us and they confiscated our gear and wrote two tickets - illegally shooting the bird and wanton waste. Had to get an attorney at some expense and go to court more than once. We won but our season was lost and our outlook towards ethical verses legal changed. Saddest part was we knew this CO.
Second time was written about on this site quite extensively. First bird I shot one morning was a mallard X black duck hybrid. I was certain of this as it seems there was a group of them in this spot that year. I ended up shooting 1 hen, two drakes and a couple of gadwalls and the crossover duck. Hung around the swamp and witnessed illegal shooting of geese and then no retrieving of those geese. Picked up quite a bit of litter in the swamp and heading to the landing. Met there by a new CO as I knew the old CO quite well. He said another group of hunters had earlier called about the illegal shooting and had already left the swamp. They told him there was one other guy out there and the CO thought it was me. I explained it wasn't me and that there was one more group still hunting
While conducting his cursory check - shotgun plug, shells, birds in the bad, he said I had two hen mallards which was one more than the limit. He also asked me if I had been drinking due to all the beer cans I had picked up in the swamp. Told him I was not drinking and would readily take a breathalyzer and that of the two mallards in question, one was a hybrid. He wasn't so sure and took both ducks to be sexed/anaylzed back at "the lab" or wherever they went. Sometime after that I got a citation in the mail for shooting two hens. Decided to fight it as I knew (or was fairly certain) I was in the right.
It was during this time that my job was eliminated. Being a 50 year old guy, out of work, and with a game violation on my record was not looking good as far as getting new job with a new company. Ended up having to go to court 3-4 times to finally get in front of judge. I refused to settle as I really didn't need a game violation on my record when looking for a new job (knowing my luck an anti would be one of the interviewers and would find the violation when conducting a background check). I was also working on projects that granted me special security access and I didn't want to lose this either.
Long story made short - had my day in court. The frozen ducks were brought in as evidence and the prosecution presented their case and I explained why I was certain they were not correct. Judge was very confused and called both sides to the bench. He asked if I would agree to just pay a small court fee so this could be resolved that day. I was willing to do so only if nothing went on my record. CO and prosecution agreed and we moved on.
CO was not a bad guy - he was just doing his job. We shook hands and said we would see each other in the field later.
What did I learn?
1. There are good and bad CO's in the field. The vast majority are exceptional at what they do.
2. Ethical and legal do not always match. Ones personal experience should weigh into any compromise that needs to be made.
3. Never ever shoot a hen mallard after shooting a hybrid. Not worth it. Never ever shoot at a hybrid after shooting a hen mallard.
4. If an honest mistake is made, own it. Maybe not that day but shoot one less bird the next time you hunt where you have an opportunity to shoot a limit.
5. Never say anything bad about a CO on a public forum. Turns out the CO in the last case read the DBHF and followed what I, and everyone on this forum was writing. Luckily, while not defending the CO's actions, I believe I always said he was pleasant and just doing his job. He was wrong but differences exist. Turns out the CO was quite appreciative of my defense of his character and it played a role in me getting off just paying court fees.
Have been mostly legal since. I went out hunting in Wisconsin once and mixed up the MN and WI season. WI was closed and I confused it with MN that was open. Didn't shoot anything but I'm sure I was doing something wrong. Also left one bird for "the eagles" one time. Shot at three coming in and missed the first and shot the second and third. Watching the first fly away, at about 300 yards it dropped dead. Put me over the limit by a bird. Came back a few days later and something had eaten it.
So there you have it and can maybe understand why we sometimes have to make decisions that are not alway legal. I can live with it and myself as I know I try to do the right things in life.
Mark
I have had a couple bad experiences. Once was hunting down on Indian Slough across from Wabasha MN. I was much younger and hunting with my Dad and his buddy. At the time there was no shooting of canvasbacks. As the morning went it and the shooting slowed, we watched a severely injured canvasback swim around the area. It was so hurt it could keep it's head up and was swimming erratically. After almost an hour of watching the injured bird, my Dad explained he was going to shoot it and leave it in the weeds for the animals to eat. He said while it is illegal, the ethical thing was to shoot the bird and end it's misery.
After shooting the bird, retrieving it and putting it in the weeds (not hiding it in the weeds) we saw the local CO coming across the marsh right towards us. He had been watching us on the scope and saw us shoot the bird. He wasn't sure it it was a redhead or a canvasback. We told him the truth and explained why the bird was shot. He didn't care, illegal is illegal. Took us back to the landing where other CO's were waiting for us and they confiscated our gear and wrote two tickets - illegally shooting the bird and wanton waste. Had to get an attorney at some expense and go to court more than once. We won but our season was lost and our outlook towards ethical verses legal changed. Saddest part was we knew this CO.
Second time was written about on this site quite extensively. First bird I shot one morning was a mallard X black duck hybrid. I was certain of this as it seems there was a group of them in this spot that year. I ended up shooting 1 hen, two drakes and a couple of gadwalls and the crossover duck. Hung around the swamp and witnessed illegal shooting of geese and then no retrieving of those geese. Picked up quite a bit of litter in the swamp and heading to the landing. Met there by a new CO as I knew the old CO quite well. He said another group of hunters had earlier called about the illegal shooting and had already left the swamp. They told him there was one other guy out there and the CO thought it was me. I explained it wasn't me and that there was one more group still hunting
While conducting his cursory check - shotgun plug, shells, birds in the bad, he said I had two hen mallards which was one more than the limit. He also asked me if I had been drinking due to all the beer cans I had picked up in the swamp. Told him I was not drinking and would readily take a breathalyzer and that of the two mallards in question, one was a hybrid. He wasn't so sure and took both ducks to be sexed/anaylzed back at "the lab" or wherever they went. Sometime after that I got a citation in the mail for shooting two hens. Decided to fight it as I knew (or was fairly certain) I was in the right.
It was during this time that my job was eliminated. Being a 50 year old guy, out of work, and with a game violation on my record was not looking good as far as getting new job with a new company. Ended up having to go to court 3-4 times to finally get in front of judge. I refused to settle as I really didn't need a game violation on my record when looking for a new job (knowing my luck an anti would be one of the interviewers and would find the violation when conducting a background check). I was also working on projects that granted me special security access and I didn't want to lose this either.
Long story made short - had my day in court. The frozen ducks were brought in as evidence and the prosecution presented their case and I explained why I was certain they were not correct. Judge was very confused and called both sides to the bench. He asked if I would agree to just pay a small court fee so this could be resolved that day. I was willing to do so only if nothing went on my record. CO and prosecution agreed and we moved on.
CO was not a bad guy - he was just doing his job. We shook hands and said we would see each other in the field later.
What did I learn?
1. There are good and bad CO's in the field. The vast majority are exceptional at what they do.
2. Ethical and legal do not always match. Ones personal experience should weigh into any compromise that needs to be made.
3. Never ever shoot a hen mallard after shooting a hybrid. Not worth it. Never ever shoot at a hybrid after shooting a hen mallard.
4. If an honest mistake is made, own it. Maybe not that day but shoot one less bird the next time you hunt where you have an opportunity to shoot a limit.
5. Never say anything bad about a CO on a public forum. Turns out the CO in the last case read the DBHF and followed what I, and everyone on this forum was writing. Luckily, while not defending the CO's actions, I believe I always said he was pleasant and just doing his job. He was wrong but differences exist. Turns out the CO was quite appreciative of my defense of his character and it played a role in me getting off just paying court fees.
Have been mostly legal since. I went out hunting in Wisconsin once and mixed up the MN and WI season. WI was closed and I confused it with MN that was open. Didn't shoot anything but I'm sure I was doing something wrong. Also left one bird for "the eagles" one time. Shot at three coming in and missed the first and shot the second and third. Watching the first fly away, at about 300 yards it dropped dead. Put me over the limit by a bird. Came back a few days later and something had eaten it.
So there you have it and can maybe understand why we sometimes have to make decisions that are not alway legal. I can live with it and myself as I know I try to do the right things in life.
Mark
Last edited:
Mark,
I guess you licked the plate clean on this one. Nothing like life experiences to provide sound advice. Thanks.
# 2 should be in bold
# 4 should be reviewed mentally each time before we go out. As you said "just own it". And I think this can be extended to the "missing in action" birds that are not recovered, but are surely to be coyote or eagle bait soon enough. Food for thought.
I guess you licked the plate clean on this one. Nothing like life experiences to provide sound advice. Thanks.
# 2 should be in bold
# 4 should be reviewed mentally each time before we go out. As you said "just own it". And I think this can be extended to the "missing in action" birds that are not recovered, but are surely to be coyote or eagle bait soon enough. Food for thought.
I'm confused, MarkW, what makes a CO "bad" for fully enforcing the law? Yes, he failed to show any level of personal discretion, but he did not side-step legality,as well as his enforcement responsibility during an era when canvasback populations were trending in the wrong direction, entrap you, or violate his/her responsibility via enforcement of the statute. You stated that you knew him, so he likely knew something of you two as well. Did his prior knowledge of you and your dad possibly influence his decision....? Sometimes the unspoken backstory is quite valuable in determining causation and motivation.
Weren't you the guy who argued it was ethical to drink alcohol while hunting waterfowl? I seem to remember that statement, tied to a comment about the "Nanny State" in your rebuttal of Larry Eckart's critique of a local sport journalist's recounting of an on-water accident.
Forgetting when the opener date is in the state you are hunting? At best, that rates a: Really? Interesting constellation of occurences...
Weren't you the guy who argued it was ethical to drink alcohol while hunting waterfowl? I seem to remember that statement, tied to a comment about the "Nanny State" in your rebuttal of Larry Eckart's critique of a local sport journalist's recounting of an on-water accident.
Forgetting when the opener date is in the state you are hunting? At best, that rates a: Really? Interesting constellation of occurences...
Mark W
Well-known member
Dear Mr. Ligman -
1. I didn't say either of the CO's were bad people? I said I had a couple of bad experiences and even specifically said the second CO WASN'T a bad guy. And yes, there are good and bad CO's. There are good and bad cops, there are good and bad lawyers and doctors and so on. Surely you believe this.
2. We knew the game warden from many years of him coming over to our blind on opener and sharing coffee and donuts with us. Our coffee, our donuts. Would also come over and eat lunch sometimes later in the season. Never did anything wrong before, never got a ticket and never broke a law. So thanks for implying we are bad people and there is a backstory.
3. I did not say it was ethical for hunting and drinking. I said I understood what the guy in the story did (drank some whiskey if I recall but I probably got that wrong as well). They had it along for some reason or another. I don't fault that. The alcohol was not the reason for their misery as the boating mishap occurred before the drinking. No one in the story said they got hammered either. I too have had a beer in the blind after the hunting was over and guns put away. Guess I'm a loser.
4. I didn't forget what opener was when. Where did I say that? Once again, appreciate you pointing it out to me. MN and WI have multiple split seasons. I have a house in each State and hunt both an equal amount of time. Wisconsin had 3 splits this year and each split was different depending on what side of a road you are on, and MN has more splits. Also happened that the zone boundaries changed that year. What had been the southern zone for over 20 years was now the northern zone. The splits were different in each zone. I got my dates mixed up by one day. Glad you're perfect.
And you question why I worry about running into a CO who shows no compassion or discretion. Look at your response to my post. Glad your not a CO in WI or MN.
Mark
1. I didn't say either of the CO's were bad people? I said I had a couple of bad experiences and even specifically said the second CO WASN'T a bad guy. And yes, there are good and bad CO's. There are good and bad cops, there are good and bad lawyers and doctors and so on. Surely you believe this.
2. We knew the game warden from many years of him coming over to our blind on opener and sharing coffee and donuts with us. Our coffee, our donuts. Would also come over and eat lunch sometimes later in the season. Never did anything wrong before, never got a ticket and never broke a law. So thanks for implying we are bad people and there is a backstory.
3. I did not say it was ethical for hunting and drinking. I said I understood what the guy in the story did (drank some whiskey if I recall but I probably got that wrong as well). They had it along for some reason or another. I don't fault that. The alcohol was not the reason for their misery as the boating mishap occurred before the drinking. No one in the story said they got hammered either. I too have had a beer in the blind after the hunting was over and guns put away. Guess I'm a loser.
4. I didn't forget what opener was when. Where did I say that? Once again, appreciate you pointing it out to me. MN and WI have multiple split seasons. I have a house in each State and hunt both an equal amount of time. Wisconsin had 3 splits this year and each split was different depending on what side of a road you are on, and MN has more splits. Also happened that the zone boundaries changed that year. What had been the southern zone for over 20 years was now the northern zone. The splits were different in each zone. I got my dates mixed up by one day. Glad you're perfect.
And you question why I worry about running into a CO who shows no compassion or discretion. Look at your response to my post. Glad your not a CO in WI or MN.
Mark
Last edited:
If you hunt enough and in multiple areas you will have a bad experience with the law going above and beyond period! Weather it be checking you in the marsh wasting your hunting time were the shooting stops early afternoon or when they "investigate" a complaint and search the entire boat. This is part of their job unfortunately. I have had some that like it and others hate it doing it. some apologize and others leave without a word with their head down.
There are good ones and bad ones out there. I think everyone on here appreciates what they do. Give them a chance and if you run into the bad ones cut it short. I always do my best to obey by the rules so I cut right to the point with the ones I don't like. If the law reads this forum they won't argue that there are good and bad cops out there. They hear the complaints locally.
Hopefully the body cameras now days help weasel out the few bad ones. I do believe it helps some.
There are good ones and bad ones out there. I think everyone on here appreciates what they do. Give them a chance and if you run into the bad ones cut it short. I always do my best to obey by the rules so I cut right to the point with the ones I don't like. If the law reads this forum they won't argue that there are good and bad cops out there. They hear the complaints locally.
Hopefully the body cameras now days help weasel out the few bad ones. I do believe it helps some.
I find it interesting that this thread--which started as purely about the ethics of what you should do in the field in an unfortunate (hypothetical) situation--has come back around to an exchange about game wardens/CO's.
Some take home points as I watch the snow pile in and keep me out of the marsh:
(1) Even among a group of experienced hunters on this site who go out of their way to hunt ethically, the old tension between warden and hunter remains.
(2) Law enforcement of any kind is a difficult job. Add the tension of doing it while knowing that everyone you check is carrying a loaded weapon and it gets harder.
(3) Law enforcement tends to attract candidates who have a black and white view of the world. There is legal and illegal. And a clean line between them.
(4) As I recall from an old movie about cops--can't remember which one--"Everything is a situation." This complicates the clean line, and some wardens deal better with "situations" than others. So do some hunters.
(5) Ethics start where the law stops. Doing what's legal is required, and you'll get punished if you don't. Doing what's ethical is optional, and a better and harder test of character. That's true in fish and wildlife, but also in business, family, and every other aspect of life.
Some take home points as I watch the snow pile in and keep me out of the marsh:
(1) Even among a group of experienced hunters on this site who go out of their way to hunt ethically, the old tension between warden and hunter remains.
(2) Law enforcement of any kind is a difficult job. Add the tension of doing it while knowing that everyone you check is carrying a loaded weapon and it gets harder.
(3) Law enforcement tends to attract candidates who have a black and white view of the world. There is legal and illegal. And a clean line between them.
(4) As I recall from an old movie about cops--can't remember which one--"Everything is a situation." This complicates the clean line, and some wardens deal better with "situations" than others. So do some hunters.
(5) Ethics start where the law stops. Doing what's legal is required, and you'll get punished if you don't. Doing what's ethical is optional, and a better and harder test of character. That's true in fish and wildlife, but also in business, family, and every other aspect of life.
Jay K
Active member
I thought of this argument this way: A CO encounters 3 guys at the ramp all with one more bird than the legal limit. All 3 of them say the same thing: "It was accidentally shot in a group passing and I felt ethically obligated to collect the bird"
Do you think he would believe all 3 guys? Being a LEO is hard. No doubt. Having said that, I have many close friends that are. They all tell me the stories they hear could fill volumes of books. I look at it from the point of view of:
Why would he have any reason to believe me apart from the next guy? Granted, I would be sincere and truthful if it were me. Don't know it would make a difference.
I don't blame anyone for answering the way they have in this thread. I can sympathize with both answers and both sides.
Do you think he would believe all 3 guys? Being a LEO is hard. No doubt. Having said that, I have many close friends that are. They all tell me the stories they hear could fill volumes of books. I look at it from the point of view of:
Why would he have any reason to believe me apart from the next guy? Granted, I would be sincere and truthful if it were me. Don't know it would make a difference.
I don't blame anyone for answering the way they have in this thread. I can sympathize with both answers and both sides.
Jay,
I like your thought process and ability to explain as well! Well said.
Is one over the limit really the end of all? I thought migratory was federal crime and cost was the same for us all? This is not a trophy animal. Maybe the cost would play out on how ethical I would be. How much is this violation?!
I like your thought process and ability to explain as well! Well said.
Is one over the limit really the end of all? I thought migratory was federal crime and cost was the same for us all? This is not a trophy animal. Maybe the cost would play out on how ethical I would be. How much is this violation?!
MarkW, thanks for the attempted "lesson" in semantic hair splitting. Again, we have your rendition of events; with a now fully complimentary back story. Robert's time with you chronicled nearly as much time in the tavern as on the water; hmmm... I wonder what his account of events would be. As my dad used to say: in any dispute there are two versions of events; the truth usually lies somewhere in the middle... I am sorry to hear that you were placed in financial hardship via all the coffee and lunches that he purportedly mooched off of you two over time! I'm left to wonder whether simply not offering them to him would have been a workable solution...
Based on some of the responses in this thread it appears that a "good" CO is a fish and game law enforcement person whose efforts should be 'tailored" to reflect the degree of understanding and personal interpretation of the laws displayed by the hunter being questioned, as well as the degree of effort expended at achieving a working knowledge of both them and season framework arrays.
How did that old Lowell George lyric go? " I never do nothin' wrong , but I always get blamed!"
Based on some of the responses in this thread it appears that a "good" CO is a fish and game law enforcement person whose efforts should be 'tailored" to reflect the degree of understanding and personal interpretation of the laws displayed by the hunter being questioned, as well as the degree of effort expended at achieving a working knowledge of both them and season framework arrays.
How did that old Lowell George lyric go? " I never do nothin' wrong , but I always get blamed!"
