|
Post by jeffpahunter on Jan 5, 2008 23:03:40 GMT -4
I don't disagree with you on that at all. As I said I'm simply stating what ONE WCO's answer was to this question. Whether he's right or wrong...I don't know ?
My point is that it MAY be up to the interpretation of the WCO involved as to whether he/she cites you or not. The court will then decide. Let me add this and although it's a different scenario it came down to one WCO's interpretation of a law.
I know a man very well who quite a few years ago received a field citation for failure to comply with the fluorescent orange requirements. I personally saw his paper work for the court hearing so it is/was without a doubt true. He was hunting Deer, had on a full coat of fluorescent orange and his hat was as well BUT the brim of his hat was brown. Now if you read the law it states "250 sq. inches of fluorescent orange to be worn on the head chest and back combined". It even goes as far to state that if it's camo fluorescent orange the total of the orange must add up to 250 sq. inches. Nowhere does it say that the hat must be ALL orange and yet while wearing a full fluorescent orange jacket this man was cited for having a hat with a brown brim on it.
The judge ruled in the hunters favor in this case.
|
|
richg
new member
Posts: 6
|
Post by richg on Jan 5, 2008 23:23:24 GMT -4
Most of my experiences with wardens have been positive but there's a few bad apples in every bunch.
|
|
|
Post by jeffpahunter on Jan 5, 2008 23:30:51 GMT -4
Oh I agree 100% Rich and none of my statements were meant to imply that either of these two were bad as they weren't, I apologize if you fealt I was taking that stance.
The one on the baiting issue was a young guy and I helped him on many occasions and he was a great guy but for whatever reason this was his view on food plots and baiting.
The other one on the orange issue has since retired and he was well known as a stickler for following things to the letter of the written law and maybe even trying to re-write some of the to suit himself depending on the situation.
|
|
richg
new member
Posts: 6
|
Post by richg on Jan 5, 2008 23:36:53 GMT -4
No need for an apology jeff I didn't take it as you were saying the two were bad apples.Sounds like the older one was alittle trigger happy with arrests.
|
|
|
Post by mrlongbeard on Jan 5, 2008 23:47:02 GMT -4
first off i didn't write the law the pgc did. and if you read it thru there lots of room for error on the pgc's side . it states if the food was use to entice deer in the last thirty days before the season it's baiting. like i said i didn't write the law, but in my opinion it's way to vague. also have had experience with wco's while hunting. and there's no question in my mind these two would bust you for baiting
|
|
richg
new member
Posts: 6
|
Post by richg on Jan 6, 2008 10:04:49 GMT -4
sorry longbeard I misread your post. I agree it's not explained very well in the book and that lets open the chance for a warden to abuse the system.
|
|
|
Post by dougell on Jan 7, 2008 10:56:15 GMT -4
The WCO's interpretation of the law doesn't matter.He can cite a person but it would be thrown right out at the magistrate level.
Foodplots are considered normal habitat management practices.If this wasn't the case,they certainly wouldn't have food plots on state game lands.
|
|
|
Post by jeffpahunter on Jan 7, 2008 12:32:44 GMT -4
I would have to agree with you on this dougell which is precisely why I worded my comments very carefully and said that the one WCO stated he would CITE someone for this. I did not want to imply that it was likely that the charge would be upheld. Citing and convicting are two entirely different things as you pointed out.
|
|
|
Post by mrlongbeard on Jan 7, 2008 12:42:54 GMT -4
the book actually say hunting over food plots on gamelands is legal but it doesn't say anything about private property. there's no doubt it would be thrown out but who wants to go thru the hassle of taking off work and going there for a bunch of baloney
|
|
|
Post by dougell on Jan 7, 2008 17:13:32 GMT -4
The regulations are the same whether it's private land or game lands.
Jeff,that WCO needs to go back to cadet school for a refresher course.Does anybody even know of a case where a WCO attempted to prosecute someone for hunting over a foodplot in Pa?
I agree that the wording in the digest can use some clarification on some issues but hunting over foodplots isn't one of them.
|
|
|
Post by jeffpahunter on Jan 7, 2008 20:39:26 GMT -4
Fortunately dougell he's moved on to become a State Trooper. Ut-oh..we drive more than we hunt so maybe that's unfortunately....
|
|
|
Post by dougell on Jan 8, 2008 10:35:31 GMT -4
Was he a WCO or a deputy?I'm not doubting what you say but I'm amazed a WCO could be that clueless.
|
|
|
Post by jeffpahunter on Jan 8, 2008 11:56:38 GMT -4
No he was a full time commissioned WCO. I traveled with him a fair amount and he seemed fine, nothing startling odd to me about him or his ways but this comment sort of took me by surprise. The HTE class where he made this statement wasn't in my mind the proper place to extend this conversation with him and unfortunately he moved on before I could bring it up again for further discussion. He was a young guy fresh out of the academy so could he have been trying to impress people and make a mark for himself ? Who knows ?...
|
|