game warden says no kids

[welsh]

What people forget when they read the letter of the law and then subject it to their own interpretation is that their interpretation has about the same value as a fart in the wind.

Charges get laid, or don't get laid, as a result of the CO's interpretation, not yours. And the answer to "Ask a CO" in the magazine is not the opinion of just one CO. A CO, or any other MNRF employee, is not allowed to so much as cough in response to a question from OOD without permission from on high. It can take weeks to get an answer to even the most innocuous question. You can bet that answer has been cleared through MNRF as the official MNRF response. MNRF's enforcement policy is that the kid isn't hunting unless he is actually assisting in the hunt.

And then, if charges do get laid, you get convicted as a result of the court's interpretation, not yours. A court is going to rely on the ordinary meaning of "lying in wait." This idiom carries an additional meaning beyond merely waiting: it means to wait with the intent of attacking. (Kindly look it up in a dictionary of English idiom before disputing this.) An unarmed kid accompanying a hunter cannot be "lying in wait," by definition. Anyone who suggests that the ordinary idiomatic meaning of "lying in wait" is replaced by another meaning here will have to do so by digging up case law. Good luck on that.

So in summary, simply having your kid with you is only against the rules if (a) the CO decides to go beyond the normal policy, (b) the CO decides today is a good day to be an a-hole, and (c) a judge decides to go against the ordinary rules of interpretation.

Going back to the OP, this is a second-hand report. Nobody knows what really happened here and everyone is speculating. This isn't much more productive than debating how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

[rumbleram]

is that Hainer on the Rondeau Bay cover?

[JBen]

Hes like my older Brother…He was a lot better looking back then (lol) but he's still a world class guy
I'll be seeing him in a few weeks, if you know him say hi for me pls.

J

[JBen]

nicely said Welsh.

The FWCA definition is pretty darn clear….Then its for COs to decide based on what they see, what they think a person intent was/is, etc, etc. As is, it gives them the ability to go after non hunters that are being idiots, abusing game, whatever.

Go, bring kids, friends, whatever…they want us to. If you must…. keep a basic principle in mind, remember fair chase and that 2nd half of the definition.

Its not hunting unless………..

[Hunter John]

Thanks Species. It was a special day for sure and Kate had her first taste of grouse that evening.

[rumbleram]

you've gotta be in violation of a fistful of laws posting his mug on a cover! lol I kid - he is indeed a great guy!!! will say 'hi' if im talkin to him before u see him

[recurve40]

Was checked by a CO this week...with my 11yr old tagging along..he had zero issues..we were deerhunting. He was sitting with me and we were checked walking out..no issues. We were checked turkey hunting as well last spring...no issues. It was obvious he wasn't helping to hunt but was observing.

[JBen]

Lmao Rumblum.
Like a slightly older brother he is. I'll be hunting with him in 47 mid Dec.