POACHED TARGET BUCK DOWN!!!!

[Hunter115522]

6 minutes ago, DV1 said:

Maybe you're right. It's idea that someone feels they have exclusive rights to, or ownership of a deer that I disagree with, and I feel causes many problems in such a crowded state. 

Maybe the poacher shot the deer on property he had access to, feeling it was his exclusive right because the deer was using that property too, and he wanted to exercise his right before the next guy did. Then the deer ran off the property and died in front of the OP's spot. The lots on Blackfoot trail are pretty small, and we only know where the deer died, not where it was shot.

 

Either way you look at it.. the poacher shot it weeks before the opener. I don't care if he shot it on private land, public, or the f*ckin moon.. he's a poaching scumbag.

[vdep217]

13 minutes ago, DV1 said:

Maybe you're right. It's idea that someone feels they have exclusive rights to, or ownership of a deer that I disagree with, and I feel causes many problems in such a crowded state. 

Maybe the poacher shot the deer on property he had access to, feeling it was his exclusive right because the deer was using that property too, and he wanted to exercise his right before the next guy did. Then the deer ran off the property and died in front of the OP's spot. The lots on Blackfoot trail are pretty small, and we only know where the deer died, not where it was shot.

Perhaps but op said the guy had a cam on a piece of town property..  either way I'm sure if the deer was shot legally on the town piece or a neighboring property the op would not have an issue and this would not be a topic

[_X7]

Got to this party late. All I know is that big bucks make people do stupid stuff.  Just like  train loads of loot motivated Jesse James and banks full of money had people making movies of Bonnie and Clyde the hero complex is a trait of the poacher. It seems a stretch but people will go above and beyond the limits of the law in search of whatever it is that motivates them. Don't let the small stuff like legality get in the way. The key is to show these people the error of their ways. Make em pay.

[DV1]

6 minutes ago, vdep217 said:

Perhaps but op said the guy had a cam on a piece of town property..  either way I'm sure if the deer was shot legally on the town piece or a neighboring property the op would not have an issue and this would not be a topic

I agree, totally. My point with that unlikely scenario was that this idea of ownership of, or exclusive rights to, a deer very often leads to exactly what happened here. Sorry if that went over everyone's head. 

Edited September 12, 2019 by DV1

[Lunatic]

1 hour ago, DV1 said:

I agree with much of what you said, but this part I quoted is ridiculous, and a big part of the reason hunting sucks so bad in NJ. Too many people think they own a deer, or a spot. It's what leads to things like stand and camera theft (trying to keep others from killing their deer), and yes, poaching. 

No one owns a deer in this state unless it's in their pen, period. Just because the deer walked across a lot an acre or less in size once or twice in it's daily routine, doesn't mean that person has exclusive rights to kill that buck. That's asinine. Have you even looked at the area where this deer lived? Do you have any idea how many people's property it crossed daily, that according to you, could claim ownership? In fact, it may even be the case that this buck was also living or spending time on property this poacher had, so, according to you, he had exclusive rights to kill it. 

Oh, I think he should be fined and shamed accordingly, don't get me wrong, but this right here is just another example of how some people are going overboard with this situation. Remember, it's just a deer. 

 I don't think we disagree on much here

however I am not sure you can disagree with the statement you quoted. When deer is on my property only I have exclusive right to kill it. Who else would have this right?

Edited September 12, 2019 by Lunatic

[Shug]

I really miss huntress 1234.. will she/ he be coming back soon?

Joe ya here?

 

Hey did everyone miss the his name ends in a vowel comment

like we should be worried he’s mobbed up.

 

Mean while ...I know, as my father in law would say.. There’s no such thing as the mafia 

Edited September 12, 2019 by Shug

[JHbowhunter]

38 minutes ago, Shug said:

I really miss huntress 1234.. will she/ he be coming back soon?

Joe ya here?

 

Hey did everyone miss the his name ends in a vowel comment

like we should be worried he’s mobbed up.

 

Mean while ...I know, as my father in law would say.. There’s no such thing as the mafia 

That MFr is the kind that cant feel remorse.  In his warped mind he took what he wanted and we can all kiss his ass. . On to the next target.  Yeah they exist. What do we do about it ?  

Edited September 12, 2019 by JHbowhunter

[DV1]

1 hour ago, Lunatic said:

however I am not sure you can disagree with the statement you quoted. When deer is on my property only I have exclusive right to kill it. Who else would have this right?

You don't have an exclusive right to kill any free ranging, wild animal. You may have sole ownership of a piece of land, but unless it's fenced, and you have a permit to keep wild animals animals on it they are not yours. You certainly don't have exclusive rights to free range wildlife. The fact you feel you do is exactly the problem I am trying to point out.

This is my point, and you keep making it for me. The fact you even think that is a problem. It's a mindset that leads to all the bad things we see hunters do to each other in this state. This presumed rights to, or worship of, deer, is what has led normally reasonable people to poach deer, steal stands and cameras, ruin others' hunts, and on this thread, equate poaching a deer with rape and murder, and to think this guy should have his entire life and family destroyed because he poached a deer. And none of you were even hunting this animal.

Remember, it's "just a deer"... "you can't eat the horns", etc. etc.. People are going overboard on this. The mindset you continue to display illustrates why.

[Livesintrees]

2 minutes ago, JHbowhunter said:

That MFr is the kind that cant feel remorse.  In his warped mind he took what he wanted and we can all kiss his ass. Laugh atfine. On to the next target.  Yeah they exist. What do we do about it ?  

We talk shit about them on the internet. That’s what I gather from this thread. I must say i enjoy it. I wonder how many members here have friends or family or coworkers that utilize his services? Sharing this story may very well take business away from him. And I’m fine with that. You make your bed, you sleep in it. 

[Livesintrees]

2 minutes ago, DV1 said:

You don't have an exclusive right to kill any free ranging, wild animal. You may have sole ownership of a piece of land, but unless it's fenced, and you have a permit to keep wild animals animals on it they are not yours. You certainly don't have exclusive rights to free range wildlife. The fact you feel you do is exactly the problem I am trying to point out.

This is my point, and you keep making it for me. The fact you even think that is a problem. It's a mindset that leads to all the bad things we see hunters do to each other in this state. This presumed rights to, or worship of, deer, is what has led normally reasonable people to poach deer, steal stands and cameras, ruin others' hunts, and on this thread, equate poaching a deer with rape and murder, and to think this guy should have his entire life and family destroyed because he poached a deer. And none of you were even hunting this animal.

Remember, it's "just a deer"... "you can't eat the horns", etc. etc.. People are going overboard on this. The mindset you continue to display illustrates why.

I read his statement pretty clear. What he’s saying is, if an animal is on his property, he is the only one who can kill it. If anyone else kills an animal on his property, they would be poaching,trespassing and so forth. And that is a fact. 

[BowhunterNJ]

1 hour ago, Livesintrees said:

I read his statement pretty clear. What he’s saying is, if an animal is on his property, he is the only one who can kill it. If anyone else kills an animal on his property, they would be poaching,trespassing and so forth. And that is a fact. 

That's how I read it as well.  I think Lunatic is simply saying no one else has any right to kill any deer on HIS property.  That makes it an exclusive right on HIS property.  He isn't saying he has the exclusive right to kill any deer that goes on his property and wanders somewhere else just because it stepped onto his property at some point, but while it is on HIS property, he is the ONLY one with the exclusive right to kill that deer.

[Buckeyes11]

50 pages......

[tcook8296]

15 hours ago, Livesintrees said:

Look who I just saw on route three. 

Probably filled with corn

[DV1]

8 hours ago, Livesintrees said:

I read his statement pretty clear. What he’s saying is, if an animal is on his property, he is the only one who can kill it. If anyone else kills an animal on his property, they would be poaching,trespassing and so forth. And that is a fact. 

Ok, fair enough. And I agree with the trespassing point he is making. 

However, that is not quite the entire context in which he said it, and why I interpreted it differently.  He also called killing the deer a theft from him. He actually compared a deer...free-ranging wildlife... walking across his property to a television set in his house, that he owns. Go back and read my post, and his response. Maybe you'll see why I got the impression I did.

My point was that idea...that any of us own or have exclusive rights to kill a certain animal... leads to many of our problems in the woods.  He actually said the poacher would be stealing from him. If someone steals a tree stand, or camera on your land, they would be charged with theft because that is something you own. A deer is not, so they are charged with trespassing, hunting out of seasons, etc, not theft.  

I get that anyone who owns property has exclusive access rights to that land, and own the land. However, no one has exclusive rights to free-ranging wildlife just because it crosses their land.  You may think it's a distinction without a difference but it's not. The mindset that places inappropriate emphasis and importance, even ownership of, or "exclusive rights" to a big buck, leads to, in my opinion, many of the problems we see in the woods. The idea someone 'owns' a deer, like they do a television set they purchased, was just an example I used to illustrate that mindset. 

There is no way for me to make that point any more clear than this post, so it's my last attempt.  Good luck Saturday everyone. 

 

[DBuck]

1 hour ago, DV1 said:

Ok, fair enough. And I agree with the trespassing point he is making. 

However, that is not quite the entire context in which he said it, and why I interpreted it differently.  He also called killing the deer a theft from him. He actually compared a deer...free-ranging wildlife... walking across his property to a television set in his house, that he owns. Go back and read my post, and his response. Maybe you'll see why I got the impression I did.

My point was that idea...that any of us own or have exclusive rights to kill a certain animal... leads to many of our problems in the woods.  He actually said the poacher would be stealing from him. If someone steals a tree stand, or camera on your land, they would be charged with theft because that is something you own. A deer is not, so they are charged with trespassing, hunting out of seasons, etc, not theft.  

I get that anyone who owns property has exclusive access rights to that land, and own the land. However, no one has exclusive rights to free-ranging wildlife just because it crosses their land.  You may think it's a distinction without a difference but it's not. The mindset that places inappropriate emphasis and importance, even ownership of, or "exclusive rights" to a big buck, leads to, in my opinion, many of the problems we see in the woods. The idea someone 'owns' a deer, like they do a television set they purchased, was just an example I used to illustrate that mindset. 

There is no way for me to make that point any more clear than this post, so it's my last attempt.  Good luck Saturday everyone. 

 

You know exactly what he meant, I don't know why you're blowing it out of proportion with your posts.