Lacy Act being used against a tv hunter again

[shaman]

Envy and jealousy? Look, the last thing I'd like to be is a TV personality. I enjoy my day job, and I love having another world to go to when it's over. I love having deer camp as a permanent way of life. I did my stint in TV production, and really did not like it. I love writing for myself and not having to suck up to a publisher or producer, and I love the 10,000 or so people that come to my weblog and read my stuff.

. . . And the last thing I would want to do is muck it up with a Lacey Act violation. No buck is worth that kind of grief. I do not care how big he is.

They'd take away my guns, I could not hunt, I'd probably do time, my life would end. It just ain't worth it. Envy of that kind of stupid? That idea comes from the back of a very short bus. It wears a helmet, and watches cartoons.

[BigIron]

BigIron,

I have to agree with Mr. Kentucky on this one.
you posted something along the lines of : one guy taking a deer illegally isnt going to hurt the deer herd.

The problem lies with several people doing this. I agree one person taking one deer isnt going to bust the herd to extinction-however:

you get a couple of hundred people doing this, who's to say the each only take one deer. they are already poaching so little by little they take them out and really put a major dent in the deer population. no-extinction wont happen over night, however what he did was wrong and should pay the price.

1/2 a million is a hefty price to pay, maybe his sponsors will chip in for him-i doubt it though. he will most likely be losing his ride on this one.
he knew the rules and broke them. plain and simple. now he has to pay for his felony.

I dont see how you could even back up someone like this? he is a shame to any true hunter that respects the land and mother nature. He is not a true sportsman. a true sportsman is a person that does the right thing even when nobody is looking. this is nothing more than being a slob.

sorry i just dont see how you can be upset by this. I am for it. as far as the lacy act being from 1900-so what? murder has been against the law for longer than that, does that mean the laws against murder should be abolished because it's old and doesnt allow criminals to go free??

1st. How do you think using the wrong tag is comparable to murder, or that it could ever conceivably lead to the diminishing of any population?

2nd. How is making a mistake (if he really did) make you a slob? Did you know that in Colorado you can't use a luminok? So if you are caught in Colorado with one in your bow case you can be cited. And if you travel across state lines you not only pay the penalty in Colorado, you are liable for the INSANE fed penalties.

3rd. What part of "if he broke Kansas' laws and paid the price in Kansas why should he be persecuted by a federal govt. on top of that??" do you not understand?

This post has never been about protecting anyone from being accountable for, and paying for a violation of game laws.

It's about a federal govt. going after an industry by using a law that was designed in 1900 to protect animals from something that CANNOT POSSIBLY HAPPEN ANYMORE.

States in 1900 didn't protect their resources for MANY reasons. Now they do. And they do it better than the fed ever could.

[BigIron]

Let me explain my reasoning for being sanguine with all this. If you break a state game law and then skedaddle across state lines, there is no way for a state to go and prosecute the offender. The Lacey Act took care of a bunch of problems.No, the Lacy Act didn't take care of any of this. In every case the state can and does prosecute these cases. The Lacy Act is only being used AFTER the states have punished the violator. You are living in an ooooold world if you think states can't punish out of state hunters. Among those were, as you say, provisions to keep game from facing extinction, but it also set up a framework for prosecution of folks who break a game law in one state and then go boogering off to another. This Spann guy makes his living hunting. He supposedly transported a prize trophy out of the state that he had poached. Enter the Feds. It's that simple.

Without the Lacey Act, the state of Kansas would have had to beg Tennessee to extradite. No, actually he owns that land now and owned the neighboring place before. He hunts a lot in Kansas. It would have been very easy to prosecute and in fact the state of Kansas is.It would have been a big hairy mess. The Feds are much better equipped for dealing with this sort of situation. Remember. back in 1900, that Western States especially were plagued with hunters coming from back East, slaughtering their game animals wantonly and then running back to their home states and living under the protection of state law enforcement that could care less. I happened to have seen a mess in the past 20 years where a bunch of execs flew into AR and slaughtered ducks wantonly and thought they could hop the company jet back home to GA and be safe. Those execs were pretty surprised when federal agents showed up at the board room. This Spann guy, if the accusations are true, is no different.

And frankly, I'm no different. If I bag a doe in KY and flop it in the back of the truck and run over the bridge to Ohio, what's going to stop me? Lacey Act of 1900, that's what. Lacey put teeth into state game laws, where they are applied to out-of-state hunters.No, the state's laws are still there and still being prosecuted. The Lacy Act is an addon. Prior to 1900, you could pretty much take the train anywhere you wanted, pay off the locals, set up camp and do what you wanted. If there was any trouble with the game warden, you hopped the train back home and just never went back to that state. This I'll agree with. Because that is the way it was back in 1900. Many of the western states and territories didn't have game laws or enforcement agencies. They all do now.

That was 1900. Now? Where this becomes a real problem, in my mind, is when you have TV guys flaunting the rules and making it look so simple. It gives the armchair nimrods the idea that state game laws are meant to be broken. Why go to all the trouble to enter lotteries and apply for licenses and tags when you can just head out to the wilderness and do what you please. As long as you don't get caught, who's to know or care? If you get caught, you can start whining about how Big Brother is infringing personal liberties. So far in the past two years, this is the third incident where some TV hunter has gotten caught breaking game rules and then bragging about it on their cable show. Maybe the ghost of Representative John F. Lacey, Republican from Iowa, is putting a scare in the right people.

I may be wrong in my assessment of envy. But it sure looks that way in the above paragraph and earlier in this post. I don't want anyone getting away with game violations. But I don't want anyone getting doubly punished (especially when that fine money is insanely large and doesn't come back to the state, and then costs me the American taxpayer hundreds of thousands of dollars to incarcerate someone for years for using the wrong tag). Regardless of how rich that person is or how he/she makes their living.

[shaman]

1st. How do you think using the wrong tag is comparable to murder, or that it could ever conceivably lead to the diminishing of any population?

2nd. How is making a mistake (if he really did) make you a slob? Did you know that in Colorado you can't use a luminok? So if you are caught in Colorado with one in your bow case you can be cited. And if you travel across state lines you not only pay the penalty in Colorado, you are liable for the INSANE fed penalties.

3rd. What part of "if he broke Kansas' laws and paid the price in Kansas why should he be persecuted by a federal govt. on top of that??" do you not understand?

This post has never been about protecting anyone from being accountable for, and paying for a violation of game laws.

It's about a federal govt. going after an industry by using a law that was designed in 1900 to protect animals from something that CANNOT POSSIBLY HAPPEN ANYMORE.

States in 1900 didn't protect their resources for MANY reasons. Now they do. And they do it better than the fed ever could

.d.


1st. I did not equate using the wrong tag to murder. I equate it to poaching-- that's what it is
2nd Years ago, I used the wrong shot in the wrong state turkey hunting, but I did not flaunt it on a TV show. Luckily no turkeys were harmed that day. The trick here is to be diligent in reading the rules and not deliberately do anything wrong.
3rd If you knowingly break a law in one state and leave that state without settling up with that state, you have committed a crime. The federal crime was that he transported the buck back to TN.

This is not the federal government "going after an industry." It is a federal agency doing what it should do: enforcing federal law.

Can the what was happening in 1900 happen again? Yes, it can.

[BigIron]

1st. How do you think using the wrong tag is comparable to murder, or that it could ever conceivably lead to the diminishing of any population?

2nd. How is making a mistake (if he really did) make you a slob? Did you know that in Colorado you can't use a luminok? So if you are caught in Colorado with one in your bow case you can be cited. And if you travel across state lines you not only pay the penalty in Colorado, you are liable for the INSANE fed penalties.

3rd. What part of "if he broke Kansas' laws and paid the price in Kansas why should he be persecuted by a federal govt. on top of that??" do you not understand?

This post has never been about protecting anyone from being accountable for, and paying for a violation of game laws.

It's about a federal govt. going after an industry by using a law that was designed in 1900 to protect animals from something that CANNOT POSSIBLY HAPPEN ANYMORE.

States in 1900 didn't protect their resources for MANY reasons. Now they do. And they do it better than the fed ever could

.d.


1st. I did not equate using the wrong tag to murder. I equate it to poaching-- that's what it isYou should read a little more slowly perhaps? The murder reference and in fact the entire quote above was in response to Hot Tamale's post. I never said you equated it to murder. But he definitely did. Caveat: unless you post as Hot Tamale too.
2nd Years ago, I used the wrong shot in the wrong state turkey hunting, but I did not flaunt it on a TV show. Luckily no turkeys were harmed that day. The trick here is to be diligent in reading the rules and not deliberately do anything wrong.There's that "flaunting it" thing again... but, you admit to being a game law violator. In fact one no worse than our subject. The only thing that differentiates you from him is that he killed and you only tried to kill. And yet you argue FOR his prosecution under the Lacy Act. I don't think either he or you should face half a million in fines or 10 years jail time.
3rd If you knowingly break a law in one state and leave that state without settling up with that state, you have committed a crime. The federal crime was that he transported the buck back to TN. BS. If you break a game law (knowingly or not) you have commited a crime. And if you had killed a turkey that fine day you would have been just as guilty as him. And subject to the same asenine federal laws.

This is not the federal government "going after an industry." It is a federal agency doing what it should do: enforcing federal law.

Can the what was happening in 1900 happen again? Yes, it can.

Why don't you explain to us all how you think that using the wrong turkey load or the wrong deer tag can lead to an epidemic of market hunting that could eventually lead to the extinction of turkeys or deer? Please enlighten us.

[shaman]

Look, I think your arguments are waaaay too hyperbolic. Before this thing reaches the asymptote I'm going to stand back.

This not the result of an overreaching Federal conspiracy. This is the feds doing what we pay them to do.

This is not a pour schlep hunter. This is a guy who, if the accusations are true, took a business enterprise and turned it toward a criminal intent by knowingly breaking the law.

Despite all of the hoopla, I still do not feel threatened by what has happened to M. Spann. In fact I feel more comfortable that the Feds are doing their job.

My reason for bringing up the turkey shot thing is to say that we are all probably guilty of doing something wrong in the field on some occasion or other. If any of us feel we haven't, we have probably forgotten something. The difference between that sort of thing and this Spann thing is a) most of us don't go out and do it wantonly b) when we get caught, we do our best to correct things before they become a federal case. c) most of us don't go on a nationally televised show and let everyone know we've done it. d) most of us don't start a website stirring up trouble and looking for sympathy.

I really don't think I have any more to add, and this is getting to look too much like a case of pig wrestling. Have a good one.

[BigIron]

And I think you're assuming some pretty far fetched things.

Like the concept that a guy who is trying to make a living by selling the public his hunting experiences in videos... had a "criminal intent" and was "wantonly" breaking the law and therefore was purposely threatening his own career.

I fail to see how that makes any kind of sense.

What I fully understand is your desire to call this a pig wrestling match and back out, when asked to justify your argument that the use of the wrong tag or the wrong load actually threatens the existence of our wildlife. Which is the ONLY thing the Lacy Act was purposed for.

I'm having a great day.

[Bowriter]

The Lacy act also allows for the confiscation of the rack. That prohibits him from exhibiting or selling it. I understand he is super rich and probably would never sell it. However, that is one benefit of the act.

Though old, the L. act has a tremendous value in today's wildlife enforcement by allowing the proscecution of offenders who might otherwise not be proscecuted. Spanbn's case is a prime example. His state violation is one that might easily have been swept under the rug. Once it became federal, that changed the picture. I view this as a deterrent.
Let me give you an example and this is hypothetical.

Let's say I want to hunt the King Ranch and cannot afford it. So I consider sneaking in and killing a major buck.

Tresspassing fine is minimal so I chance it. But the Lacey act fine is not minimal so I won't chance it.

Bottom line. Guy breaks the law, probably knowingly however, I do not know that. Now, he, just as you or I would, has to pay the penalty. I believe that is fair all the way around. Spook should have known better. I think he probably did.

[kellory]

I seem to be in the minority on this one. I see the Lacy Act as it is used today, draconian. Much like cutting off someone's head for a traffic violation. Or going after a fly with a sledge hammer.
I am not debating right and wrong, only that the penalty for an error is much too steep. If I, while hunting out of state like Shaman, make an error in ammo, or equipment or paperwork, then come home with the meat, I could lose my home, my future, and my kid's future,
Some have admitted to errors. How far retro can the Lacy Act reach? Can it be used by this administration to hunt down offenders from earlier years? I would not trust this president with a pair of dirty socks.
Judging by ammo costs, taxes, and track record, I would agree that Obama is willing to circumvent our rights for his vision, and I would believe he would use any tool at his disposal, to further his agenda. His track record so far, would support that.
The Lacy Act, is one of the major reasons, I would like to see a universal hunting permit. Buy in any state, and use in any state. After all, I can not be using Natural Resources, in more than one state at a time. If I am hunting in Utah, I am not hunting in Maine, or new Mexico. And the way they stick it to you for non-resident hunting is sinful. We have family land in several states, but I make only one out of state trip. The fees are too damn high for more.
I have had to turn down many hunts because the fees would break me, added to the cost of the trip itself. I would gladly pay 4 times the fee for my permit, , to be able to choose where to use it. and when.) Maybe bow hunt, Ohio, gun hunt Indiana, and mussel loader in Illinois? Every region has limits as to how many deer can be taken from that area. Ohio has three zones, and where I can take 6 or 7 deer. One with antlers per year. As long as you follow the rules for each area, why should it matter which state you are in? Or what state you are from? You are still only in one state at a time. We should be free to hunt across this nation.instead of shackled to each state, like hostile countries. This is one nation, under God, and we should be able to hunt the bounty provided with out draconian penalties
. I honestly don't see any real benefit to the Lacy Act now. It is strictly punitive. It doesn't do anything FOR wildlife, that I can see, it just punishes the guilty like a sledgehammer on ants. Unlike community service, there is no redemption, no learning, and no recovery. I would agree, that the states themselves, are fully capable of upholding their own laws, where the penalty fits the crime. And since states now work together against game law infractions, the Fed is redundant. And laws that have outlived their purpose, should be repealed, not re-purposed.

[BigIron]

I seem to be in the minority on this one. I see the Lacy Act as it is used today, draconian. Much like cutting off someone's head for a traffic violation. Or going after a fly with a sledge hammer.
I am not debating right and wrong, only that the penalty for an error is much too steep. If I, while hunting out of state like Shaman, make an error in ammo, or equipment or paperwork, then come home with the meat, I could lose my home, my future, and my kid's future,
Some have admitted to errors. How far retro can the Lacy Act reach? Can it be used by this administration to hunt down offenders from earlier years? I would not trust this president with a pair of dirty socks.
Judging by ammo costs, taxes, and track record, I would agree that Obama is willing to circumvent our rights for his vision, and I would believe he would use any tool at his disposal, to further his agenda. His track record so far, would support that.
The Lacy Act, is one of the major reasons, I would like to see a universal hunting permit. Buy in any state, and use in any state. After all, I can not be using Natural Resources, in more than one state at a time. If I am hunting in Utah, I am not hunting in Maine, or new Mexico. And the way they stick it to you for non-resident hunting is sinful. We have family land in several states, but I make only one out of state trip. The fees are too damn high for more.
I have had to turn down many hunts because the fees would break me, added to the cost of the trip itself. I would gladly pay 4 times the fee for my permit, , to be able to choose where to use it. and when.) Maybe bow hunt, Ohio, gun hunt Indiana, and mussel loader in Illinois? Every region has limits as to how many deer can be taken from that area. Ohio has three zones, and where I can take 6 or 7 deer. One with antlers per year. As long as you follow the rules for each area, why should it matter which state you are in? Or what state you are from? You are still only in one state at a time. We should be free to hunt across this nation.instead of shackled to each state, like hostile countries. This is one nation, under God, and we should be able to hunt the bounty provided with out draconian penalties
. I honestly don't see any real benefit to the Lacy Act now. It is strictly punitive. It doesn't do anything FOR wildlife, that I can see, it just punishes the guilty like a sledgehammer on ants. Unlike community service, there is no redemption, no learning, and no recovery. I would agree, that the states themselves, are fully capable of upholding their own laws, where the penalty fits the crime. And since states now work together against game law infractions, the Fed is redundant. And laws that have outlived their purpose, should be repealed, not re-purposed.

I don't think it could be stated any better. While I might have gotten side tracked, that is the major thrust that I tried to project. The states all have enforcement and laws that are punitive enough. The fed law is punitive beyond reason.