some people need to read regulations

Here are the ill-informed opinions I've personally heard and who I've heard them from:

"Canada geese are protected, they're our national bird" (non-hunters)
"Its illegal to put out bait/salt for deer" (hunters and non-hunters)
"Crossbows are illegal" (non-hunters)
".223 is illegal for deer" (hunters)
"semi-automatic rifles/shotguns are illegal" (non-hunters)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Snip

Here is an interesting situation that actually happened to us. We were party hunting deer in a controlled hunt several of us sat on escape routes from a thick swamp area. We sent 2 guys in across a pasture field from a road to go through the swamp to move things around. No deer were spotted. The 2 guys left the same way they went in and upon walking back to the truck they noticed deer tracks in their footprints in the snow and laughed about being outsmarted. Upon getting in the vehicle the 1 guy noticed a deer piled up against the fence along the road 20 yrds in front of the truck. They went over and sure enough it was the deer that came out on their tracks appeared to have run into the fence and broke it's neck stone dead. Is this an animal that should be tagged legally or is it considered a found deer and you just fill out the info on the ministry site? How does it look hanging with other deer if no tag is on it and a CO comes by? Again hard to believe but this really did happen.

---

I'm pretty sure that it could be proven by the fact that there would be no bullet or arrow entry point. Even after field dressing a deer and skinning it, you would still be able to tell whether it was shot or not, unless you decided to butcher the animal in the field as well.

The story itself is incredible. Sometimes, deer can do some REALLY interesting things.

Letter of the law.

Is quite clear. You don't have to have a firearm with you to be charged wth hunting offences. There is actually no grey in the law on this one.

And in fact not long ago, a couple Yahoo!'s were charged with harassment and hunting without a liscence for joy riding a Moose.

Hunting is ABC ( lying in wait, pursuing etc) with the intentint to kill, capture etc

Hunting isn't ABC (thing like lying in wait) when there's no intention to kill, capture etc. So photography, scouting, wildlife viewing...no problems

Unless

The game is harassed, injured or killed as a result of your actions. Then you are "hunting"

So
Yes you most certainly can be charged. So can photographers, dog walkers and more.

If your actions (lying in wait, calling, ) result in X being hurt, harassed or killed

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Snip

Here is an interesting situation that actually happened to us. We were party hunting deer in a controlled hunt several of us sat on escape routes from a thick swamp area. We sent 2 guys in across a pasture field from a road to go through the swamp to move things around. No deer were spotted. The 2 guys left the same way they went in and upon walking back to the truck they noticed deer tracks in their footprints in the snow and laughed about being outsmarted. Upon getting in the vehicle the 1 guy noticed a deer piled up against the fence along the road 20 yrds in front of the truck. They went over and sure enough it was the deer that came out on their tracks appeared to have run into the fence and broke it's neck stone dead. Is this an animal that should be tagged legally or is it considered a found deer and you just fill out the info on the ministry site? How does it look hanging with other deer if no tag is on it and a CO comes by? Again hard to believe but this really did happen.

---

Simple, call it in. If you find a deer that was dead like this just call it in, I actually have the number of the CO in my wallet due to a few questions like that.

I would call the basic phone number and ask them, I would see about getting a phone number for the CO and I would document my calls. If you take the deer with no evidence of an arrow or bullet wound and you have the evidence of the date and time of your call and any conversation you had with the CO as to what to do then you should be fine. This would not be much different than a deer being hit by a car, it is just a little more interesting due to it being in an open season while you were hunting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fox

Simple, call it in. If you find a deer that was dead like this just call it in, I actually have the number of the CO in my wallet due to a few questions like that.

I would call the basic phone number and ask them, I would see about getting a phone number for the CO and I would document my calls. If you take the deer with no evidence of an arrow or bullet wound and you have the evidence of the date and time of your call and any conversation you had with the CO as to what to do then you should be fine. This would not be much different than a deer being hit by a car, it is just a little more interesting due to it being in an open season while you were hunting.

---

I agree with JBen. The big difference is, they were actively "hunting", with firearms, with full intent of killing the deer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by buckluck_9pt

i understand what you guys are saying, about it not saying to tag before field dressing.. however, the insertion of the word immediate , I believe, is to make it clear that the first thing that should be done to any wild game is to tag it... hence the word immediately... i sent yet another email to my local CO here as i always send them questions when it comes to reading and interpreting these regs and laws.. they enforce it so they will have better understanding as to what is expected from us hunters... i will post their response once I get it...

---

I think that when the legislation was drawn up for "party hunting" our legislators got "lazy" and decided the use of "immediate" was fine for group hunting. When in fact its very different from hunting solo with the tag in your pocket. Now when you consider the distance allowed for party member 5 klms the wording in pretty unreasonable. I know that the intent is to prevent poaching and all that,but would wording like "a soon as is reasonably practical" not be a bit better.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilroy

I think that when the legislation was drawn up for "party hunting" our legislators got "lazy" and decided the use of "immediate" was fine for group hunting. When in fact its very different from hunting solo with the tag in your pocket. Now when you consider the distance allowed for party member 5 klms the wording in pretty unreasonable. I know that the intent is to prevent poaching and all that,but would wording like "a soon as is reasonably practical" not be a bit better.

---

Courts have difficulty convicting someone based on the interpretation of one word. A similar instance is the HTA offence of tinted windows. The section said "substantially"...the courts here would not convict when there was no definition of "substantially". To put "immediately" into context, if I shoot an animal at 1000 yds away, in very rough terrain, there's no way I can tag that animal "immediately". Same goes for the party hunting scenario. Conversely, an animal shot at 50 yds can be tagged "immediately". Charges laid would have to be based on the circumstances and the totality of the evidence needed to support a conviction.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilroy

I think that when the legislation was drawn up for "party hunting" our legislators got "lazy" and decided the use of "immediate" was fine for group hunting. When in fact its very different from hunting solo with the tag in your pocket. Now when you consider the distance allowed for party member 5 klms the wording in pretty unreasonable. I know that the intent is to prevent poaching and all that,but would wording like "a soon as is reasonably practical" not be a bit better.

---

i actually think that would be worse.. immediately means once you ( and the tag holder if it is another in the party) find it, tag it.. immediately means just that, immediately.. i think a lot of people are trying to challenge the whole theory of immediately.. the definition is rather clear.. by putting a quote like " as soon as reasonably practical" opens up more of a loop hole than you may think.. what is reasonably practical? right away? or after we drag it out, gut it and get it hung in the cooler?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rick_iles

I agree with JBen. The big difference is, they were actively "hunting", with firearms, with full intent of killing the deer.

---

true, but they could also argue that this deer wasn't hunted, but found dead.. similar if i am driving to my hunting spot and find a dead deer, if i have my firearms in my vehicle ( which means they are in my possession) , am i going to get charged with hunting that animal? no... i agree with the post, call it in and document it... if they can not see any bullet or arrow holes, they can pretty much assume it wasn't shot or hunted.... in this hunters instance, the could also argue that if they hunted it the deer carcass would be pretty fresh.. depending on how long the deer has sat there, they could also rule out it being hunted.. if a hunter is hunting small game let's say ( we often hunt squirrel during the controlled deer hunt if we don't get drawn for it) and i walk up on a dead deer, no evidence of being shot... no blood trail, no entrance or exit wound... am i not able to claim it without facing charges of hunting out of season? i would imagine so.. seeing how there would be no evidence of being shot by a firearm, i have a firearm but not a firearm acceptable to kill a deer ( i hunt with a .22lr) and i have no shot that would indicate i am hunting for large game.. heck, even if i am using my 20 gauge or 12 gauge, if all i have on me is bird shot, etc, i can't be charged with hunting it... this opens up a lot of scenario's and discussion on what could go wrong... i watch a series on youtube, can't remember the name of it, has to do with following CO's around and the one they stopped a guy, his dad and his son ( around 12 years old) and they claimed to be grouse hunting.. dad and father had both 12 gauges.. CO asked to empty all they loads ( taught us this in the fish and wildlife course too) and sure as hell, the father had 2 bird shot and a deer slug in his gun.. the dad had bird shot in the gun but had 2 deer shot , SSG's , in his vest pocket... they got charged.. co stated if they emptied their guns and had NO sign of shooting a deer ( hence the ssg's and the slugs) they would have let them carry on...

Years ago Rick there was a question on the "Ask a Co" website. It may still be there but have fun digging it up.

Can I scout deer at night from my truck using flashlights (its headlights maybe) if there are no guns in the truck.
Answer: While it seem like its ok, ( or something like that) did anyone ask the deer if they might feel like they are being harassed..

How often have I witnessed "professional" photographers getting too close to animals......or "harassing" them. Say the animal moves off 50 yards and the photog follows for another "200 pictures" clickety click click click.. All the time, all the time.
How often have I witnessed a buck bolt.....millions.
And if it runs out into the road and gets smoked as a result.

"Unless"
its harassed, hurt or killed

And then those things like lying in wait, calling, in pursuit of, meet the legal definition of hunting and the letter of the law.

While the regs most certainly often are filled with grey area's, or ambiguous definitions, this to me is one of the better ones.There is no grey room, but lots of room for COs to use their discretion.....based on what they are seeing...based on our actions.
"hunting"............or not