Big bucks worth more than does & fawns!

[lichen fox]

So, someone has finally "sold" this theory to someone in the legislature and probably some in the Dnr that shooting a "trophy" animal requires a larger fine and/or revocations as the illegal harvest of a doe or a fawn or a smaller buck

....From H.F. 2171...added wording is underlined.

Subd. 3. Issuance of a big game license after conviction. (a) A person may not

4.12obtain any big game license or take big game under a lifetime license, issued under section

4.1397A.473 , for three years after the person is convicted of:

(1) a gross misdemeanor violation under the game and fish laws relating to big game;

(2) doing an act without a required big game license; or

(3) the second violation within three years under the game and fish laws relating to big game.; or

(4) any other violation involving taking a deer that is a trophy deer scoring higher than 170 using the scoring method established for wildlife restitution values adopted under section 97A.345.

( A person may not obtain any deer license or take deer under a lifetime license

issued under section 97A.473 for one year after the person is convicted of hunting deer with the aid or use of bait under section 97B.328.

© The revocation period under paragraphs (a) and ( doubles if the conviction

is for a deer that is a trophy deer scoring higher than 170 using the scoring method established for wildlife restitution values adopted under section 97A.345.

[Musky Buck]

It's obvious when you head west on a hunt, there's more value on antler, price out buck or bull tags vs. calf or antlerless tags. The all-season tag we used to have was geared toward bucks, the multi-zone buck same, prices were higher vs. the regular firearm season. It's also real obvious when it comes to canned hunts, we have a trophy society good or not, last sunday they played for "the ring" medals at the olympics, antlers for our walls or chandeliers ?

[Gordie]

Well I think this is a start.

I know that poaching will contine to be a problem but if they start pushing tougher laws on the poachers then it may curb it a bit.

I know that all deer should be considered trophys and they are but These guys that go out and just kill for the rack and leave the rest lay they do deserve a tougher penalty.

I do think it should be tougher than this.

[InTheNorthwoods]

There is nothing wrong with this type of legislation. It is directing a greater amount of punishment at those who poach the most likely target for a majority of the poachers on the loose. It isn't a law that simply values one deer higher than another deer, it is a law meant to prevent people from poaching who otherwise wouldn't (but for the temptation of the trophy animal). This places a greater amount of "risk" on those that poach trophy animals. Quite frankly, if someone poaches a doe for food, I think most people could care less. If someone poaches a big buck for the head and the bragging purposes, it irks people.

[WalleyeChamp]

I like it,,, Bump it down to 120 inches and you'll get a little more thought before the shot.

[DinnerPail]

+1

[ATV hugger]

+1

[Big Dave2]

Rediculous!

If poaching is a problem and larger fines are needed then the fines should be raised across the board, not just for trophy animals. Sounds to me like people don't care about poachers unless they are taking the trophies. Is poaching less of a problem if someone shines a doe instead of a large antlered buck?

This kind of stuff is going to be the ruination of hunting.

[eyeguy 54]

+1 poaching is poaching

[certified jumbo]

I agree large fines would be good regardless of size. But, I don't have a problem with a larger fine for shooting a trophy animal either.

[eyeguy 54]

Would a 150 inch 6 point taken with a bow be a true trophy?

[picksbigwagon]

How does this compare to say speeding? Is there a number of miles per hour over the posted where the fine jacks up more than say 5-10 mph over?

[Big Dave2]

How does this compare to say speeding? Is there a number of miles per hour over the posted where the fine jacks up more than say 5-10 mph over?

IMO thats not quite the same. Speeding is illegal because it is dangerous, the faster you go the more of a danger you become.

This law is like saying if you murder an old ugly man you get less prison time than if you murder a super model.

[Gordie]

Not saying that this is right but the poachers that poach a doe are doing it for the meat.

Then there is poaching that is done for only one reson the rack and the rest is left to lay.

I dont think either is acceptable and both should be punished and they are both punished the same but they have a bit stiffer penaltys for the poacher that does it for the rack.

As I stated in my first post Its a start and I think it needs to be even a stiffer penaltys for this crimes of poaching.

[Big Dave2]

Not saying that this is right but the poachers that poach a doe are doing it for the meat.

Then there is poaching that is done for only one reson the rack and the rest is left to lay.

I dont think either is acceptable and both should be punished and they are both punished the same but they have a bit stiffer penaltys for the poacher that does it for the rack.

As I stated in my first post Its a start and I think it needs to be even a stiffer penaltys for this crimes of poaching.

Thats like saying, if I steal because I need to feed my family I should get a lesser penalty than if I steal just to be greedy. Stealing is stealing, poaching is poaching.

[hockeybc69]

Is theft the same as theft?

Oh wait. Nobody was in danger(like was used for the speeding ticket argument).... but if you steal more goods(or higher value), your sentence is increased.

Oh why do I even try and argue with BD2 involved. I have seen its hopeless.... yet entertaining too.

[Gordie]

I didnt say it was right but how I think they are trying to break this down.

Poaching Is poaching just as a DUI is a oh wait that is a different type of law DUI can hold different penaltys for each offence.

Man has put a price tag on trophys made it what they are today more than just food for the table so I think its only fitting the the penalty more severe for this.

[harvey lee]

I agree it is just as bad no matter what sex one shoots. I highly doubt too many fawns are being poached.

At least when they shoot a doe there is no wanton waste involved where the buck, that is shot, rack taken and then we have to get into the added issue of wanton waste.

I am just happy they are looking at putting more teeth into the poaching laws.

In the future if they deem it needed, then we can add a higher fine for does.

I would like to see the percentage of doe vs bucks poached. I would guess it is higher just due to the rack.

As far as I can see, take the gun, vechile used asnd no hunting forever and then a fine by size, age or something in that direction.

We will never stop it so all one can do is try to cut it down a bit.

[picksbigwagon]

Poaching IS theft, theft of a natural resource that is regulated and controled by the state.

Steal a state owned stapler (yes, even a red one) and the prosecution of that crime is different than stealing a state owned vehicle. Why? Because the percieved value of the vehicle is more than a stapler, just as a percieved value of a doe is less than a buck of a certain antler size.

Now I will agree that this law seems to be based on perceptions of value, but if we really want to get into it, everything is based on perception of value isn't it?

[Bear55]

I agree large fines would be good regardless of size. But, I don't have a problem with a larger fine for shooting a trophy animal either.

This is where I stand too. Those bigger bucks have a target on their backs when it comes to poaching, a little extra kick in the shorts to the poacher is fine by me.

[pikestabber]

I will agree that this law seems to be based on perceptions of value, but if we really want to get into it, everything is based on perception of value isn't it?

+1 Absolutely! This isn't really that new in the outdoor world (or in any aspect of law for that matter). Restitution for trophy fish is higher than non-trophy fish...has been for many, many years. If you keep a 30" walleye out of season, your fine is far greater than keeping a 15" walleye out of season, and I agree with that. It's almost a "supply and demand" type of thing. Take a drive at night in an area with a healthy deer population. What do you see? Does and fawns...lots of them. How many 170+ bucks do you see? Few or none at all. Why wouldn't we make it a harsher penalty to take something more rare? If you steal a candy bar and the Hope Diamond, which one comes with a bigger fine do you think? We can argue "perception of value" all day long, is it right or wrong?, etc., but I guarantee this...perception of value was the way of the world 1,000 years ago and still is today--that will never go away. Human nature.

[WalleyeChamp]

Big Dave, Eye guy. Although I agree with you to an extent, there are reasons why punishments fit the crimes.

Compare it to this. You steal a candybar from the store and you get a slap on the wrist. You steal a truck after you walk out of the store and you go to jail for a while. Stealing is stealing, just different levels. If you poach a bunny out of season should you get the same punishment as you would by corking a 180" Whitetail?

I happen to like the fact that they are looking at harsher punishments for the bucks. I'm sure many does are poached but I'd bet those are eaten (not that I'm okay with that) compared to a poacher taking a 6 year old giant buck and cutting off the rack or leaving the rest go to waste with the only intent being the bone on top of his head.

[96trigger]

I like the new regs. Its about time. Putting more teeth into the law is still a long way from conviction though and the deer still has to reach 170 which is a rarity in itself. I personally think the bar is set too high and that it should increase for any legal buck. As we have hashed over numerous times in this forum, that 120 inch that got shot could eventually be a 170 inch buck.

[lichen fox]

(4) any other violation involving taking a deer that is a trophy deer scoring higher than 170 using the scoring method established for wildlife restitution values adopted under section 97A.345.

( A person may not obtain any deer license or take deer under a lifetime license

issued under section 97A.473 for one year after the person is convicted of hunting deer with the aid or use of bait under section 97B.328.

© The revocation period under paragraphs (a) and ( doubles if the conviction

is for a deer that is a trophy deer scoring higher than 170 using the scoring method established for wildlife restitution values adopted under section 97A.345.

I think some are missing the "whole" point...it's not just "poaching"...the same penaltys will also include...."4) any other violation involving taking a deer..."

So, if you have a 170 or better buck in the back of your truck and you get ticketed for a loaded or uncased firearm,(in areas or situation where they must be cased...ie: in certain towns, etc), Or, if you get caught using cell phones or other types of radio in locating the animal, or, if in your excitement you did not clear the "road right of way" before you started shooting...baiting...etc...

"ANY other violation...involving taking a deer"...

[eyeguy 54]

Now I will agree that this law seems to be based on perceptions of value, but if we really want to get into it, everything is based on perception of value isn't it?

to a meat eater the nice young doe would be of more value than the big old buck with the huge rack and tough meat. wink wink