Poachers at large

eelgrass

eelgrass

Long Time Member
Messages
31,956
These guys are so hung out to dry when they get caught. LE won't let up until find out who was responsible.

From the California Department of Fish and Wildlife:


In the early morning hours of Aug. 21, 2016, at 12:40 a.m., a California Department of Fish and Wildlife warden was shot at as he attempted to stop a vehicle containing multiple persons suspected of spotlighting. The wildlife officer was not hit. Spotlighting is an act of poaching when a person shines a bright light into an animal?s eyes at night, freezing them in place, then shooting it.

As the wildlife officer attempted to conduct a vehicle stop on the suspect vehicle near Redwood House Road near Highway 36, at least one of the occupants opened fire on him and they fled the scene in the vehicle. The wildlife officer pursued the vehicle and called for backup while relaying vehicle and suspect information. The suspects continued firing at him as he pursued. The suspects ultimately crashed their vehicle into a tree and fled into the night. Due to the presence of multiple suspects, their intent on shooting him, and lack of immediate assistance, the warden waited for help before continuing the search. Multiple agencies responded to the call for assistance from the Wildlife Officer. The suspects were not located as of today.

https://lostcoastoutpost.com/2016/aug/21/suspects-who-shot-state-fish-and-wildlife-officer/
 
When you aim a spot light at a big game animal at night, then shoot it, That is illegal taking off wildlife, aka poaching

Yelum

YBU

7019yelumlogosig2.jpg
 
TRI
Did you miss the part about shooting it.

"I have found if you go the extra mile it's Never crowded".
>[Font][Font color = "green"]Life member of
>the MM green signature club.[font/]
 
>TRI
>Did you miss the part about
>shooting it.
>
>"I have found if you go
>the extra mile it's Never
>crowded".
>>[Font][Font color = "green"]Life member of
>>the MM green signature club.[font/]


This may cost Tri lunch with a lawyer friend.
 
Thank you eelgrass. There are places all over the country and the world in which spotlighting is legal. But this article just told a bunch of hunters to consider those people poachers.
 
Sounds like if things would have gone differently, they'd be murderers. Poaching will be the least of their problems. mtmuley
 
Tri, well I didn't read the wardens full report as to why he decided to do a check on these guys. They may have only been driving around shining a spotlight looking for a lost friend or something.

But mtmuley is right, they have much bigger problems. They went from a simple possible citation situation to a felony warrant for attempted murder.
 
Eel, I would not be surprised if they are meth heads and had dope in the vehicle with them, and possibly some outstanding warrants.

Tri state you can legally spotlight deer in CA. as long as you do not have any weapon with you, or in the vehicle that is capable of taking game animals. If you spotlight and have any weapon capable of taking game, you violated game laws. At least it was that way when I retired from law enforcement.

Sometimes CA. Fish and Game laws and CA. penal code conflict. Example-game laws say the firearm must not have a shell in the chamber to be considered not loaded while in a vehicle. Shells in the magazine is ok. Penal code states no shell in chamber or magazine or attached to the firearm in any manner while in vehicle on public road. If mag has shell, you violated penal code law of loaded weapon in vehicle while on public road.
Since I was the patrol Sgt. in the hill area, where deer hunting is done, I had to bring that conflict to the attention of our county D.A. and how did he want to handle.
The decision was during hunting season the penal code law would not be enforced unless we had another separate violation like spot lighting. I arrested several would be poachers who dumped the shell in the chamber on the floorboard of the vehicle thinking they would skate. They got nailed for both spot lighting and loaded weapon in the vehicle due to shells being in the magazine attached to the firearm. I always seized their firearm for evidence and impounded their vehicle to convince them to go elsewhere in the future to do their poaching.

RELH
 
Guys I think yall misunderstand my point.

I know these fellas have much bigger problems than spotlighting now. And much like you I hope these guys are imprisoned for many years following this crime. But now WE have much bigger problems because of this article.

What I am trying to point out is the disservice which the article does to legal sportsmen all over the world. Obviously we can see that not just Californians are reading this but anyone who can access it via the worldwide web. Now maybe millions of people believe anyone who uses a spotlight is a poacher. THESE THINGS MATTER. I don't think many of yall realize the stigma which that word can attach to people. Imagine being at the company picnic and everyone there decides your an animal poacher just because they don't understand wildlife laws and they read this article. THAT WORD IS JUST AS DAMNING IN TODAY'S SOCIETY AS BEING CALLED A RACIST. Good people loose out when the press gets loose with the facts. WE NEED TO HOLD THE PRESS TO A HIGHER STANDARD.
 
Tri, I understand what you are saying, but IMO, you misunderstood the article. The article clearly stated that "Spotlighting is an act of poaching when a person shines a bright light into an animal?s eyes at night, freezing them in place, then shooting it."

Key word is "when". It did not state that shining a light is illegal. The statement said, "then shooting it." It was pretty clear to me.

Yelum

YBU

7019yelumlogosig2.jpg
 
From the article:


In the early morning hours of Aug. 21, 2016, at 12:40 a.m., a California Department of Fish and Wildlife warden was shot at as he attempted to stop a vehicle containing multiple persons suspected of spotlighting. The wildlife officer was not hit. Spotlighting is an act of poaching when a person shines a bright light into an animal?s eyes at night, freezing them in place, then shooting it.



I've always called the actual act of shooting deer under a spotlight "jackin deer". Some places it is legal to spotlight deer without a weapon in possession. The reporter makes the leap without actually saying these guys shot a deer. Most reporters I've been in contact with could f'up a wet dream. But as I said in my earlier post I could care less! These a'holes shot at a warden multiple times! F'n hang em!
 
Yelum,

I am not splitting that hair. What I am saying is there are places, and circumstances, other than California where it is perfectly legal to shine a light in the eyes of a game animal AND BLOW HIS BRAINS OUT. But according to this article that is poaching even though it is totally legal.

This is one way the complexity of our game laws are actually hurting the public face of hunters to non-hunters.
 
I hope for their sake they were on drugs or booze... if not they are unbelievably STUPID!! Trading a several hundred dollar fine for 20 yrs or so.

Just for the record spotlighting is a GREAT TIME. You just gotta leave the booze drugs and guns at camp... but man do you get to see some amazing deer that only come out at night. Makes it hard to sleep till morning hoping he stays up just a tad late the next am.

And yes many people equate spotlighting as synonymous with poaching, doesn't ruin my fun.
 
RELH, thanks for that. I had forgotten that law about using a spotlight with a firearm in possession.

I think I see what you're saying Tristate. For example, in most rivers in California it's considered poaching if you keep a wild steelhead while fishing. Other places it's perfectly legal, and not poaching.

I don't think the word "poaching" is a legal term. It's more like the term "thief". The term thief covers many different legal scenarios. It could be used to describe a shop lifter or a bank robber or someone who takes a pen from work. :)
 
That's what I am talking about Eelgrass.

It is very hard for the non-hunter to look at us and be able to determine the difference between a hunter and a poacher. They don't understand that a poacher is determined by breaking a wildlife law and not by committing an action. This article makes it look as if people who use a spotlight to shoot animals are bad people when in fact it is people who do this where it is illegal are doing bad by letter of the law.


As a side note does anyone know why spotlighting is usually made illegal?
 
Tri, I really do know what your point is, and the article was very ambiguous in its information.

My guess is the law relates to fair chase, as defined by Boone and Crockett. Same reason Game and fish sets legal hunting hours, to give game a break.

Yelum

YBU

7019yelumlogosig2.jpg
 
Another thread ruined.

Some guys spotlight deer and shoot at a warden and somehow people are forced to defend the term "poacher"? Unbelievable.

I guess the guys who shot the Hyde Park buck weren't poachers because they had a tag and merely shot it an area closed to hunting. But if they'd shot it somewhere else and during the day, it would have been fine. In fact, nobody is a poacher because there isn't even a law called "poaching". Okay, got it.

Boy, that was a useful exercise and definitely good for the perpetuation of our sport (sarcasm).

Grizzly
 
"As a side note does anyone know why spotlighting is usually made illegal?"

So people who live out in the woods can get some sleep? :)
 
Grizzly,

Grow up and quit being so melodramatic. Everyone is in agreement on these guys being scumbags. So we can keep following stream of thought and discuss tangent topics to the article. Doesn't mean anyone is defending poachers.


eelgrass,

good post. :D Most spotlighting isn't restricted because of fairness to the animal and the hunt as many would think. And very little to do with Boone and Crockett. In fact spotlighting laws in most areas are adopted for two reasons. Public safety and increased hunt failure. That's right, many state agencies depend on a significant number of deer tags to go unpunched. Many of the regulations that we live under are to promote hunt failure but sold as "fairness".
 
RE:possible Poachers at large

In hindsight no one should have even responded to City Boys whining about what is or what isn't poaching.
 
RE:possible Poachers at large

Tri-state is the one with a reading comprehension failure. That original article made it very clear that it is the combination of spotlighting and SHOOTING THE DEER is what makes it a poaching violation.
Tri gets his panties in a wad for no real reason except he enjoys getting on the tree stump and shouting his message to everyone. Must be a small man syndrome.

RELH
 
RE:possible Poachers at large

Actually RELH at no point do they call it a "poaching violation". You may want to go back and read.

Then you may want to read my posts. Because my argument has absolutely NOTHING to do with whether these people fired a weapon under a spotlight or not. My issue is the ignorant person who wrote the article and painted all people, HUNTERS TOO, which shoot game under a spotlight as poachers, WHICH ISN'T TRUE.
 
RE:possible Poachers at large

As I recollect, in Utah you have to purchase a $25.00 spotlighting license to shoot any game at night like coyotes, skunks, raccoons and such. Years ago, when we had a wild hare, we would go hunting skunks in the field to save the pheasants or coyotes to save the deer. Just a spur of the moment type of thing. It is not happening today.
 
RE:possible Poachers at large

Here we still kill pigs, any introduced big game, elk, bobcats, lions, coyotes, all with spotlight. In certain circumstances it is legal to shoot whitetailed deer under spotlight. On certain properties I hunt in Africa it is perfectly legal to shoot all game under a spotlight.
 
RE:possible Poachers at large

>Here we still kill pigs, any
>introduced big game, elk, bobcats,
>lions, coyotes, all with spotlight.
> In certain circumstances it
>is legal to shoot whitetailed
>deer under spotlight. On
>certain properties I hunt in
>Africa it is perfectly legal
>to shoot all game under
>a spotlight.


BFD, nobody cares.
 
In TARDville they Poach Game animals!

In KALI they must be Poaching Pot?:D











[font color="blue"]dude has his Resume turned in to be Hillary's
Intern[/font]
 
No worries eelgrass. Thankyou for posting. In my industry I deal with non-hunter ignorance influencing the public and even law makers all the time. It is a much larger issue for all hunters than most understand. How television, the internet, newspapers etc. talk about us and our laws influence our opposition and very often it is not by accident or ignorance at all.

I really just want average hunters to be aware of what they are up against.
 
So the moral of this thread-jacking is that guys that shoot at cops shouldn't be reported as poachers, instead we want them called legal hunters? Yeah, that will help on "television, newspapers etc".

Counterproductive, much?

Grizzly
 
Its past your bed time grizzly and you have school in the morning. It is obvious you need to be there on time.
 
>Eel, I would not be surprised
>if they are meth heads
>and had dope in the
>vehicle with them, and possibly
>some outstanding warrants.
>
>Tri state you can legally spotlight
>deer in CA. as long
>as you do not have
>any weapon with you, or
>in the vehicle that is
>capable of taking game animals.
>If you spotlight and have
>any weapon capable of taking
>game, you violated game laws.
>At least it was that
>way when I retired from
>law enforcement.
>
> Sometimes CA. Fish
>and Game laws and CA.
>penal code conflict. Example-game laws
>say the firearm must not
>have a shell in the
>chamber to be considered not
>loaded while in a vehicle.
>Shells in the magazine is
>ok. Penal code states no
>shell in chamber or magazine
>or attached to the firearm
>in any manner while in
>vehicle on public road. If
>mag has shell, you violated
>penal code law of loaded
>weapon in vehicle while on
>public road.
> Since I was
>the patrol Sgt. in the
>hill area, where deer hunting
>is done, I had to
>bring that conflict to the
>attention of our county D.A.
>and how did he want
>to handle.
> The decision was
>during hunting season the penal
>code law would not be
>enforced unless we had another
>separate violation like spot lighting.
>I arrested several would be
>poachers who dumped the shell
>in the chamber on the
>floorboard of the vehicle thinking
>they would skate. They got
>nailed for both spot lighting
>and loaded weapon in the
>vehicle due to shells being
>in the magazine attached to
>the firearm. I always seized
>their firearm for evidence and
>impounded their vehicle to convince
>them to go elsewhere in
>the future to do their
>poaching.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>RELH

Colorado is similar, I think. The CPW office in Denver was pretty ambiguous about the law. Dunno what the local fishcop will say, all I got was his voicemail.
 
Spotlighting is indeed "poaching" if the animal dies in California, which is the frame of reference for this article. Similarly, honor-killing an unfaithful sister is illegal in the U.S., and best described as "murder" to an American audience, even though this may not be true in Afghanistan. My apologies to the Afghans annoyed by the suggestion, but it is an impossible task to write for every ill-informed reader that may fail to distinguish between legal and illegal practices across the globe. By that standard, a Californian could not use the term "poached" to describe a bear killed over bait, a salmon snagged through the back by a treble hook, etc. simply because someone, somewhere, takes offense at the description of his preferred hunting style. Surely, the term "poaching" need not be reserved for only such activities recognized as universally illegal, even if there were any such thing.
 
Bullskin,

That's a really great analogy however offended Afghanis don't vote and influence law in this country. Plus we quit worrying about their feelings about the time we toppled their government and burned their country to the ground.

However the writer in this instance only needed to take 1/2 a second and say spotlighting in California is illegal. Instead he threw millions of sportsmen WHO AREN'T POACHERS under the bus.

I think you would feel differently if you and your clientele actually profit off of spotlighting.
 
>So the moral of this thread-jacking
>is that guys that shoot
>at cops shouldn't be reported
>as poachers, instead we want
>them called legal hunters? Yeah,
>that will help on "television,
>newspapers etc".
>
>Counterproductive, much?
>
>Grizzly


Exactly!

and once again city boys shows his true colors, just a leech on Americas wildlife.
 
>Bullskin,
>
>That's a really great analogy however
>offended Afghanis don't vote and
>influence law in this country.
> Plus we quit worrying
>about their feelings about the
>time we toppled their government
>and burned their country to
>the ground.
>
>However the writer in this instance
>only needed to take 1/2
>a second and say spotlighting
>in California is illegal.
>Instead he threw millions of
>sportsmen WHO AREN'T POACHERS under
>the bus.
>
>I think you would feel differently
>if you and your clientele
>actually profit off of spotlighting.
>

The writer would have been wrong. It's not illegal to spotlight in California.

Never mind......:)
 
I question the conclusion that one can spotlight deer in California as long as one has no firearm. Lights are permitted while hunting non-game species and furbearers, I believe, but not game animals. And, even if one is not hunting deer, with or without a weapon, intentionally lighting them may result in a "harassment" charge and citation. This is what I was told by a warden, although I have not read it specifically stated in the regulations.
 
As a follow up, the net is closing in.
---------------------------------------------
Man Suspected of Shooting at Fish and Wildlife Officer Named; Warrant Issued for His Arrest

On Sunday, August 21, 2016 at around 12:40 a.m. a California Fish and Wildlife Warden was on patrol on Redwood House Road in Carlotta, when he observed a vehicle and persons engaged in spotlighting deer. The F&W Warden attempted to conduct an enforcement stop on the vehicle when a person who was in the rear of the vehicle opened fire on the Warden. A vehicle pursuit ensued with the suspects crashing the truck off the road. The suspects fled into the woods and disappeared.

The Humboldt County Sheriff?s Office took over the investigation along with the District Attorney?s Office. Investigators from the Sheriff?s Office and DA?s Office learned through their investigation that 24 year old Shawn Eugene Hof Jr. was one of the suspects. The Sheriff?s Office has obtained a $500,000 Ramey Warrant for Hof?s arrest.

Shawn Eugene Hof Jr. is described as 5?9? tall, 150 lbs, with brown hair and brown eyes.

https://lostcoastoutpost.com/2016/aug/26/suspect-named/
 

Similar threads

txhunter58
Wildlife commission appointment/reappointments?
Replies
9
Views
341
AZGuy
AZGuy
txhunter58
Relocation of problem wolves. 😁
Replies
55
Views
2k
HntHrdr
HntHrdr
Redbluff77
Best gun for self defense against Grizzly/ Brown Bears ?
Replies
38
Views
2k
LIK2HNT
LIK2HNT

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

3DEF9E80-4F09-4FF3-8AD9-B83A66A5D396.jpeg
20201206_101228.jpg
2023 elk.jpg
524470_10200477809523577_86876633_n.jpg
2015 buck.jpg
SAM_2891.JPG
SAM_2990.JPG
Screenshot_20220907_152918.jpg
Screenshot_20220907_152818.jpg
IMG_0104.jpeg
ABAD01A7-21E6-4C56-87D7-4D9F0E4297DD.jpeg
IMG_7445.jpeg
Back
Top Bottom