some people need to read regulations

[Dythbringer]

It doesn't have anything to do with abandonment or allowing game to spoil. It's the "immediate" tagging requirement. In his case, he did have a tag...

But you have to be at the kill site to tag for the immediate tagging requirement and there isn't anything in the FWCA which gives a time frame to get to that kill site other than the spoilage. Also, if party hunting, the shooter doesn't have to use his tag on the animal he shot.

While leaving a dead deer to spoil over night in 25 degree weather is against the law, it is unrealistic for CO's to think the minute a deer is shot at and hit, a hunter needs to go recover the deer, especially in a party hunting situation where the doggers aren't through yet. Should the shooter go to where they shot the deer and look for sign? Absolutely. Is he be expected to drop everything and go find that deer right at that second? That is very unreasonable.

[Hunter John]

I'm still howling about Fox's sister having nuts. Lmao. Carry on gang.

[JBen]

adds for food for thought, though I think to has been "answered".

Theres 2 minutes left of legal light on the last day of the season. A great buck comes in. You pull the trigger, it takes off.
30 minutes later you come down out your stand and start the track.

One hand, uh uh, season is closed
Other hand. Roh Roh, law says I have to do everything reasonably possible.
/grins maniacally

Last day of the rifle season, 15 minutes before last legal. Hunter shoots a buck. The only person with a buck tag left is 30 minutes away.
Hunter sits in the stand for 25 minutes.
Ruh Roh?

There is no way we can cover every possible scenario, every possible contingency. In most cases the letter (and spirit) of the law is straight forward. In most cases the letter of the law is very clear. But we know its not always straight forward, nor is it always possible. I have had to give up on a buck due to thin ice and the likely hood of recovery, and risk to personal safety.

Twice I have tracked bears with no audible death moan. Once at night and that was a serious gut check ( not to mention dragging it through pure hell and the risk of the tag coming off), and once for safety reasons the track was put off until first light. Late august if the meat spoils.........well letter of the law says X, common sense says Y. This track, despite being in daylight was a gut check to. It was beyond obvious we weren't going to find a bear piled up, despite lots of blood initially. No graze this........ We were going to find a very scared bear, or very angry bear that would need to be put out of its misery right quick. And the bush we tracked it through, well it could have been curled up licking its wound 3 feet away and we would not have known until we tripped over it...Assuming the first sign it was under your foot was its roar.......

Immediate tagging is pretty clear to, even to the extent when party hunting in terrain that isn't suitable to radios and signals.

In virtually all those situations, its the COs discretion.
"intent" or what he deems "your" intent is/was is pretty darn important, its extremely important in the courtrooms to.

I wish the crown had the "tested" the hunting without a license charge in that Moose incident. No doubt the defence would have argued "no intent" and because theres no weapons around defence could make a case. But the letter of the law is straightforward ( if you harass, injure, capture, or kill game as a result...you are "legally" hunting)

But these days, crowns always plea things away. Saves court time, saves the system $, and eliminates any risk of it not going their way.

Bottom line.
Letter of the law
COs discretion

[Dythbringer]

adds for food for thought, though I think to has been "answered".

Theres 2 minutes left of legal light on the last day of the season. A great buck comes in. You pull the trigger, it takes off.
30 minutes later you come down out your stand and start the track.

One hand, uh uh, season is closed
Other hand. Roh Roh, law says I have to do everything reasonably possible.
/grins maniacally

Last day of the rifle season, 15 minutes before last legal. Hunter shoots a buck. The only person with a buck tag left is 30 minutes away.
Hunter sits in the stand for 25 minutes.
Ruh Roh?

There is no way we can cover every possible scenario, every possible contingency. In most cases the letter (and spirit) of the law is straight forward. In most cases the letter of the law is very clear. But we know its not always straight forward, nor is it always possible. I have had to give up on a buck due to thin ice and the likely hood of recovery, and risk to personal safety.

Twice I have tracked bears with no audible death moan. Once at night and that was a serious gut check, and once for safety reasons the track was put off until first light. Late august if the meat spoils.........well letter of the law says X, common sense says Y. This track, despite being in daylight was a gut check to. It was beyond obvious we were going to find a bear piled up. We were going to find a very scared bear, or very angry bear that would need to be put out of its misery right quick. And the bush we tracked it through, well it could have been curled up licking its wound 3 feet away and we would not have known until we tripped over it...Assuming the first sign it was under your foot was its roar.......

Immediate tagging is pretty clear to, even to the extent when party hunting in terrain that isn't suitable to radios and signals.

In virtually all those situations, its the COs discretion.
"intent" or what he deems "your" intent is/was is pretty darn important, its extremely important in the courtrooms to.

I wish the crown had the "tested" the hunting without a license charge in that Moose incident. No doubt the defence would have argued "no intent" and because theres weapons around defence could make a case. But the letter of the law is straightforward ( if you harass, injure, capture, or kill game as a result...you are "legally" hunting)

But these days, crowns always plea things away. Saves court time, saves the system $, and eliminates any risk of it not going their way.

Example 1, recovering a deer doesn't need to happen during hunting hours. You can recover a deer after dark as long as your firearms are encased. Same logic would apply to a open season versus closed season.

Example 2, is a variation on my argument of spoilage being the factor driving for recovery time; not some set period of time from time of shooting.

[DanO]

Kinda like party fishing.....nearly unenforceable!!!

Not if you have a CO sitting back with binos on a migratory trout stream/harbor. They just record who catches what based on clothing colour.

[buckluck_9pt]

I think you are starting to flip flop on your position!!!

i haven't flip flopped one bit.. i said from the very start that some people's definition of immediate is not just that, immediate.. yes it will take some time for some hunters to get there, while some can get to their game within minutes.. like i say, MY definition of immediate is that you are to make every immediate attempt to get to that game to tag it.. however, like mentioned by others, there are more than one scenario a CO will take into account.. did you make every attempt to immediately get to and tag that animal? how far did you have to travel? are you the tag holder or is the tag holder 4 or 5 kms away? etc.. some people say ( which i believe this whole conversation started) is that you can get to your game, take pics, move it, start gutting it before tagging it.. that is not the fact.. if you get to your game, tag it, immediately... now, as some say, immediate is going to be up to discrimination of a CO.. if you take 3 or 4 minutes to gather your breath ( again if you had a fair hike to get to your game) or have a celebratory high five before tagging it, no issue at all.. IF you decide to piss around, move it to a "better " spot to field dress it and start to field dress it ( i have known people in our old ML group that would always throw it on the quad and drive it to a field edge before tagging and field dressing it) , or even start to field dress it where it lays, then yes, you as a hunter have violated the term of "immediate"... those are, again, in my eyes and my interpretation of the regs and laws based on my experience, my conversations with CO's and my schooling when I was taking my introductory Law Enforcement in the Fish and Wildlife.. also with my family history in the law field ( mother worked for crown attorney and law firm for over 30 years) so, I understand how some of the regs can be miscued and taken out of context.. but i also know how some of these officers will convey those regs and decide to either charge or dismiss any wrong doing.. in this case , like many, I have emailed a CO to get their take on this and what THEY would do and how THEY enforce the term immediate when it comes to tagging.. not once have I flip flopped.. nor will I.. lol

[LiveBates]

I'm still howling about Fox's sister having nuts. Lmao. Carry on gang.

Hahaha. Don't knock chicks with nuts....sometimes that's the difference between $500 and $100.
.........so I was told.

[Fox]

Last comment and I am out, Rick, there is president to the comments.

My father was hunting in a gang in Eastern Ontario, the neighbouring gang as well as their gang had no doe tags. A buck and a doe were run out of the bush by the dogs to the neighbouring gang, one guy shot the buck and the doe looked at the shot while high tailing it out of there, ran right into a tree and broke her neck. They called the MNR and they came to investigate, there were no bullet holes, the deer was dead as a door nail, the CO wrote up a note for them stating that it was investigated and they could have the deer.

Done and over with, they were not charged with poaching an animal they did not shoot, this is almost identical to the previous post.

Reading the rules is just so easy eh.

Bye Bye

[Bluebulldog]

My favorite is one that comes from non-hunters not necessarily people against it just people that have no idea any of the rules or regulations at all... "you can't hunt canada geese! They're protected! They're called CANADA geese for a reason!"

I just smile and nod! sure thing bud!

Sent from my SM-G925W8 using Tapatalk

I've had that argument previously.

A number of years ago, a lovely smoked goose breast pate, made by a chef friend of mine was out at a lovely New Years spread.

A well meaning lady ( I'll use that as a term of convenience), shrieked in my face, and threatened to call the MNR, the Police, etc.

I calmly listened to her rant, then walked out to the truck and grabbed the copy of the regs ( the was before smart phones), and calmly inquired why it said I could take 6 per day?

[GW11]

There's a lot of hair-splitting and speculation going on in this thread but the only correct answer has been said a few times. Discretion of the officer.

It doesn't matter if the charge seems "unreasonable". It doesn't matter if the same circumstance has been given a "pass" somewhere else at another time. One CO might charge you for something where another guy doing the same thing would not be charged when checked by a different CO. You're just spinning your wheels trying to come up with a concrete definition of "immediately" when it comes to tagging an animal while party hunting. The OP has emailed a CO for his interpretation, but what he will receive is only that officer's interpretation. They won't necessarily all enforce things the same way.

In my opinion, "immediately" just leaves a wide open door for a CO to deal with each situation as he sees fit. If he suspects that a group is trying to get away with something or if they're being uncooperative in their explanation of why they didn't immediately tag an animal, they'll likely be charged. If another group somewhere else is in a similar situation, yet their explanation makes sense and everything appears to be on the up and up, it would likely be overlooked. Or maybe the CO is in a bad mood that day and he charges them anyway.

I have party hunted for deer for over 25 years and have probably been in dozens of situations where a CO could lay a charge based on the definition of "immediately" if he wanted to. You can't always follow the law exactly as it's written. When it comes to party hunting and "immediately", think about how a CO will see it, or even how it could possibly look, because most of the time you won't be within the definition of "immediately".