CO activity around Marlbourough forest lately

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trimmer21

I like that approach,Gilroy. Addressing a CO in that manner conveys two things to them,immediately,that you know your civil rights and that you expect them to have their (i's) dotted and (t's) crossed because you're not about to tolerate horse s**t from "anonymous sources". Of course,you and I know how to do that professionally,but,for others,maybe not so much,leaving the impression with CO's that they're being handed "attitude" from the get-go.

---

I agree presentation is important and keeping your cool and to be honest with you all my inter reactions with CO,s have been generally very good.We did have an over enthusiastic CO up in White River one year who accused us of shooting a Bull Moose without a bull tag.This was based on him finding the severed legs of a Cow Moose legally harvested lying on a bush trail.One of the guys went to dump the legs away from camp and dropped one on the road of his atv.In the meantime the Cow Moose carcass was 100klms away hanging in a butchers shop.Well fortunately one of the guys had taken pictures of the hanging Cow Moose with tag attached on the meat pole. Cleared the whole matter up,we all had coffee and this same CO dropped into camp in the following years and we got to know him pretty good.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilroy

Well I think its very natural to get upset and self righteous when hunters are out there simply trying to enjoy hard earned day,s off and holidays.

What we have to be aware of these days that did not exist back 30 years ago are there are plenty of people with agendas and axes to grind against hunters.
They have no problems picking up a phone and making a outlandish or false complaint. If you are approached by a CO in that event my first question would be
"what it the problem officer" followed by "have you reduced this complaint into writing and do you have the complainant,s signature on that complaint.
If the answer is negative request that be done and exercise your right to not incriminate yourself.

Its pretty amazing how a story changes when a memo book is taken out and a detailed question and answer is conducted with complaints made in bad faith.
Even more so when the complainant is cautioned they could be charged with public mischief if the allegation is found to be patently false.

P.S. Mike you are somewhat safer from this type of interaction with a CO as you have your own place to hunt on.Spare a thought for the other hunters who have to hunt in public accessed areas such as the one discussed in this thread.

---

I could tell you a crazy story or two about the conduct of a group of CO's on private property. Things can get pretty interesting when they assume a certain thing is going on and they don't find what they expect to find. Then toss in the fact that they have put all of their manpower for the area on opening day into one "sting" and it turns out to be more or less a wild goose chase. The experience was enough to make a couple of members of our group give up hunting that particular animal and one member quit hunting altogether.

I'd be happy to share the details of that day through PM with anyone interested in the story and would like a real eye-opener. I'm not sure that posting it all publicly would be a good idea.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GW11

I could tell you a crazy story or two about the conduct of a group of CO's on private property. Things can get pretty interesting when they assume a certain thing is going on and they don't find what they expect to find. Then toss in the fact that they have put all of their manpower for the area on opening day into one "sting" and it turns out to be more or less a wild goose chase. The experience was enough to make a couple of members of our group give up hunting that particular animal and one member quit hunting altogether.

I'd be happy to share the details of that day through PM with anyone interested in the story and would like a real eye-opener. I'm not sure that posting it all publicly would be a good idea.

---

Unless you are exposing some secret enforcement methods which might hinder future investigations I would post away.The great thing about forums like these is that they do educate and inform a lot of us and give new hunters plenty to think about.There are hundreds of years of collective hunting experiences with the members and we can greatly reduce the learning curve and that cant be a bad thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilroy

Unless you are exposing some secret enforcement methods which might hinder future investigations I would post away.The great thing about forums like these is that they do educate and inform a lot of us and give new hunters plenty to think about.There are hundreds of years of collective hunting experiences with the members and we can greatly reduce the learning curve and that cant be a bad thing.

---

Well it's a fairly long story and maybe it's best if I didn't further derail this thread and I'll go ahead post it under a new title. My concern is not so much with exposing enforcement methods as it is about the details exposing too much about who the CO's involved were and who I am. There would also be a pile of judgement by the internet lawyers thrown my way but I'm not too worried about that. I'll try to manipulate it so the "who and where" stays anonymous and the "what" is still conveyed. It is definitely a story that all hunters should hear.

I find it very interesting reading these posts from several retired Police Officers. Some good sound advice coming from them in regards to dealing with CO's.

I think it's important to remember the purpose and functions of the CO as opposed to a P.O. The CO's mandate is to protect and manage wildlife, fisheries and the natural resources . By default, we, the general population become their adversaries, if you will, in them doing their job. They aren't out to help people. They aren't concerned about protecting the public, as a P.O. does during his/her daily duties.
Add to this, the fact they are short on personnel and budget means they are naturally going to try and do more, with less. I equate it to a small guy fighting a big guy? The little guy is going to have to use every trick in the book to get results. The CO's will and do try everything they can to get results in their favour. Since it is JQ Public between them and their mandate, guess what?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hondroid

I have a problem with that comment but it's not uncommon coming from law enforcement or their supporters.

You assume that everyone who is charged is of low income and fits a certain demographic. That's called a stereotyping.

I'm a retired autoworker who made big bucks and my wife is a medical professional. We both are entitled to numerous weeks of PAID HOLIDAYS, LIEU DAYS AND SICK DAYS. I've had a few tickets in which case I would either take a PAID HOLIDAY or I have hired a paralegal to "deflate" that ego....and have and WON.

---

You just made my point. You fighting the ticket "COSTS" you. Be it a payed sick day, a lieu day, or a vacation day. The expense of gas, parking and your time. Where do you want to spend your day in court or with the wife/kids?

Not sure where or how you think I am enforcement or a "supporter". What ever you think a "supporter" does that's not me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Snowwalker

You just made my point. You fighting the ticket "COSTS" you. Be it a payed sick day, a lieu day, or a vacation day. The expense of gas, parking and your time. Where do you want to spend your day in court or with the wife/kids?

Not sure where or how you think I am enforcement or a "supporter". What ever you think a "supporter" does that's not me.

---

Personally if I was not guilty of an offence I,am having my day in court, don,t care how much it costs me.I would want an allegation aired out completely and want to give my full defense.Rolling over is a bad policy as poor officers laying poor charges just continue and we all get screwed by them.Best check on them is to be in the hot seat with a Justice listening to the evidence and hopefully then getting sanctioned on the stand.

This is why we have the mess today in law enforcement, Police officers giving out unwarranted tickets for crap offences,laying several charges,the public hiring a para legal to make a deal or save points and those same officers never having to take the stand and prove their cases.They continue on and on and actually think they are doing a good job, when if fact they are doing a lousy job.Get them on the stand and have the crap cross examined out of them.

Quote: Defend everything. Plead guilty to nothing and let a jury decide.-- Mr. Justice George Inrig. The man was a legend in Ontario Superior Court and one of the smartest men I've ever met.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilroy

Personally if I was not guilty of an offence I,am having my day in court, don,t care how much it costs me.I would want an allegation aired out completely and want to give my full defense.Rolling over is a bad policy as poor officers laying poor charges just continue and we all get screwed by them.Best check on them is to be in the hot seat with a Justice listening to the evidence and hopefully then getting sanctioned on the stand.

This is why we have the mess today in law enforcement, Police officers giving out unwarranted tickets for crap offences,laying several charges,the public hiring a para legal to make a deal or save points and those same officers never having to take the stand and prove their cases.They continue on and on and actually think they are doing a good job, when if fact they are doing a lousy job.Get them on the stand and have the crap cross examined out of them.

---

True on all points. Just burns my butt that JQ public has to install professional behavior in them, since the training never did.

Quote:

---

Mr. Justice George Inrig. The man was a legend in Ontario Superior Court and one of the smartest men I've ever met.

---

I used to cut his grass!!