Thread: Filling someone else's tag

So, I've heard a few rumors of people filling someone else's tag. Unfortunately I can't remember who these people were so don't ask. In the first case it was the neighbor of an elderly man who had land owner preference tags. The neighbor supposedly just shot the elk for which he had a tag forthan gave the meat to the land owner. In another case there was a father-in-law with a tag and son-in-law hunting. While out hunting the father-in-law and son-in-law spotted the elk, the father handed the rifle to the son-in-law and let him shoot the elk. Now, I've read the regs and it says in no uncertain terms that that is illegal.

Now my questions is, legality aside, is it an unethical or immoral thing to do? After all, someone has a tag for 1 animal, 1 animal gets killed, and nobody knows the difference. I'm just wondering what some others opinions are on the subject.

IMO it depends on why and what.

If they are trophy hunting no it is not ethical. If it is a "rare or limited" animal I dont agree.

If you are filing a tag for food for a person who needs/uses a common game animal I am dont feel that is a bad thing.

I have no problem with you helping out your elderly neighbor with a little animal control and I think you being able to have that bonding experience with your son-in-law is now something you two will always have. You can rest easy in my book woodsman, one tag one kill.

No matter how you want to justify it, if you shoot an animal you don't have a valid tag for, you are poaching. But say whatever you want to make it "OK". If you shoot three elk while hunting with intensions of tagging the first and having your family/friends tag the others, you just poached two elk. The only exception is when it is clearly legal, i.e. disabled hunters and mentor programs when allowed.

Happy Poaching party hunters....

Originally Posted by Quaka Wacka

No matter how you want to justify it, if you shoot an animal you don't have a valid tag for, you are poaching. But say whatever you want to make it "OK". If you shoot three elk while hunting with intensions of tagging the first and having your family/friends tag the others, you just poached two elk. The only exception is when it is clearly legal, i.e. disabled hunters and mentor programs when allowed.

Happy Poaching party hunters....

Sounds like somebody didnt get their tag this year and only bought the points.

Originally Posted by deadeye

Sounds like somebody didnt get their tag this year and only bought the points.

Got and filled my tags this year. I just have no tolerance for poachers or guys trying to justify poaching.

Poaching - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Poaching is the illegal taking of wild plants or animals contrary to local and international conservation and wildlife management laws. Violations of hunting laws and regulations are normally punishable by law and, collectively, such violations are known as poaching.


So it is a violation of LAW, not of morals. Just because the law says something does not make it immoral.

In CA "assault weapons" are illegal does that make the people there that want to own them immoral?

How many laws out there are just laws and are actually contrary to "good" morals?



.

Originally Posted by Quaka Wacka

No matter how you want to justify it, if you shoot an animal you don't have a valid tag for, you are poaching. But say whatever you want to make it "OK". If you shoot three elk while hunting with intensions of tagging the first and having your family/friends tag the others, you just poached two elk. The only exception is when it is clearly legal, i.e. disabled hunters and mentor programs when allowed.

Happy Poaching party hunters....

Agreed.

Originally Posted by Nwcid

Poaching - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Poaching is the illegal taking of wild plants or animals contrary to local and international conservation and wildlife management laws. Violations of hunting laws and regulations are normally punishable by law and, collectively, such violations are known as poaching.


So it is a violation of LAW, not of morals. Just because the law says something does not make it immoral.

In CA "assault weapons" are illegal does that make the people there that want to own them immoral?

How many laws out there are just laws and are actually contrary to "good" morals?



.

Alright I'll go a little further (both true stories)

For those that say one tag one kill.

Imagine your hunting the bottom of a good drawn know to produce elk. You spot a herd of elk coming over the top and headed your way. With several bulls in it. You hear a gunshot from the guy above you and one bull drops. No biggie, there are two more. Now that guy shoots the two other legal bulls. And the rest of the herd runs right by you. As you aproach the guy he's calling in his buddies on he radio to tag the other two bulls.

Or

Your trying to close the distance to a bull feeding on a far hillside. Right as you get into range you here a gunshot and the bull drops. Oh well thats hunting. You go over to check out the bull and offer to help the guy get it started. As you congratulate him, he tells you its smaller than the one he shot two days ago. And this one is for his wife back in Portland.

If you tell me you still don't see a problem with this, I'm calling you a liar. Poachers steal game that you have paid to be able to hunt. No poachers means more game for everybody who follows the rules.

Hunting laws are written to make it a level playing field between you and other hunters.(and give the animals a chance) When you break those laws to get an advantage over the other hunters or take an animal that might not have been taken, Y-O-U A-R-E P-O-A-C-H-I-N-G!

Originally Posted by Quaka Wacka

Alright I'll go a little further (both true stories)

For those that say one tag one kill.

Imagine your hunting the bottom of a good drawn know to produce elk. You spot a herd of elk coming over the top and headed your way. With several bulls in it. You hear a gunshot from the guy above you and one bull drops. No biggie, there are two more. Now that guy shoots the two other legal bulls. And the rest of the herd runs right by you. As you aproach the guy he's calling in his buddies on he radio to tag the other two bulls.

Or

Your trying to close the distance to a bull feeding on a far hillside. Right as you get into range you here a gunshot and the bull drops. Oh well thats hunting. You go over to check out the bull and offer to help the guy get it started. As you congratulate him, he tells you its smaller than the one he shot two days ago. And this one is for his wife back in Portland.

If you tell me you still don't see a problem with this, I'm calling you a liar. Poachers steal game that you have paid to be able to hunt. No poachers means more game for everybody who follows the rules.

Hunting laws are written to make it a level playing field between you and other hunters.(and give the animals a chance) When you break those laws to get an advantage over the other hunters or take an animal that might not have been taken, Y-O-U A-R-E P-O-A-C-H-I-N-G!

Well I hunt where no one else is legal to be so they will have real problems if they drop any animals without my permission. I do understand your point though.

The second part of what you said goes against the first part I said. I dont agree with trophy hunting in that way. I said I feel a bit of leeway for folks that need the meet to help though a year. I live on the east side of the state and there are many families here that a decent part of their meet come from game.

I hardly ever fill my tags and I can sitting in my easy chair in my living room and opening my window. I get my tags because I am out hunting with my buddies and IF I see a nice buck that I want I will take it. I dont eat that much venison so I usually let my buddies fill theirs first. I usually get one every 2-3 years cause that is all I eat and I wont waste a game animal either.

I also feel for the folks who truely need the meat, but that is rarely the case for those who are party hunting and poaching in other ways. But there are programs and assistance out there; and in this day and age with tags, ammo, butcher supplies and even minimal fuel it doesn't pencil out in very many cases to be cheaper. If everybody who is having a tough time making it right now, went out and poached a deer or elk, there wouldn't be much left for next year. In the end they are still stealing. Being broke, still doesn't make it ok to steal in my book.



And I'm sorry but I also don't get the "we live on the eastside" sense of entitlement to the game. You merely hinted to it but I do hear it a lot. I grew up on the westside, but we also grew, raised and hunted our own food, and we never had to poach to do it either. We very rarely bought meat back then and very rarely buy it now. The abundance of game is no longer there and we all have to share the resource and follow the rules. Nobody is above the law because of where they live.

Originally Posted by Quaka Wacka

Alright I'll go a little further (both true stories)

For those that say one tag one kill.

Imagine your hunting the bottom of a good drawn know to produce elk. You spot a herd of elk coming over the top and headed your way. With several bulls in it. You hear a gunshot from the guy above you and one bull drops. No biggie, there are two more. Now that guy shoots the two other legal bulls. And the rest of the herd runs right by you. As you aproach the guy he's calling in his buddies on he radio to tag the other two bulls.

I think this may be a case of anger displacement here. It's not woodsman's fault that you can't pull you're bubblegum together and take down a buck before some other bloke manages to get not 1, not 2, but 3 elk. Now I did notice that you made it a point to mention that these stories were true, so i'm sure they were fabricated.

Also, what's with this new age poaching? We're gonna go and illegally shoot an animal but by God, let's make sure we buy the proper tags and make sure we do it in season. What happened to getting drunk, going out at night with a spotlight and laying waste to the wildlife? I guess i'm just old fashioned.

[
Also, what's with this new age poaching? We're gonna go and illegally shoot an animal but by God, let's make sure we buy the proper tags and make sure we do it in season. What happened to getting drunk, going out at night with a spotlight and laying waste to the wildlife? I guess i'm just old fashioned.[/QUOTE]

Old fashioned is awesome! That is one of the funniest statements I've ever seen, thanks for making me nearly wet myself.

3 bulls down, 3 TAGS filled. Not yours, oh well. One couple from Kelso got caught in E WA "poaching". They both, husband and wife, got drawn for special tags somewhere in E WA (don't remember where). He filled his tag, then got another one and put his wife's tag on it. They are being prosecuted, or were being, I didn't follow it that closely. But, 2 elk down, 2 tags (legally purchased, so the state got their cut) filled. I don't see the problem

Originally Posted by iusmc2002

[
He filled his tag, then got another one and put his wife's tag on it. They are being prosecuted, or were being, I didn't follow it that closely. But, 2 elk down, 2 tags (legally purchased, so the state got their cut) filled. I don't see the problem

The "legal" point is that if it is "your tag" then you must be the one pulling the trigger, not someone else filling your tag for you. Just because someone has a tag does not entitle them to an animal. The only thing a tag entitles people to is the opportunity to earn an animal. If they don't earn it then they don't deserve it. I believe we owe the animals that much at least.

So, what verbage or spelling of words, that when strung together, make statements and deliver a message to the brain dont people get?

Read, understand and follow the printed ODFW regulations and rules.

No tag issued in your name....well, you're poaching (thats a punishable crime by the way)
Taking game out of season....see above

wrong size or type of firearm

and even casual target shooters going into the hills,....if you are in an area that has an open season on some game animal going on, and you have a firearm with you and are in the field, say, target shooting, you might really want to consider having a valid/current oregon hunting license on your person!

Originally Posted by BWH

and even casual target shooters going into the hills,....if you are in an area that has an open season on some game animal going on, and you have a firearm with you and are in the field, say, target shooting, you might really want to consider having a valid/current oregon hunting license on your person!

I'll agree with everything but this statement ^. I have never been, nor should I be, accused of hunting when I'm out target shooting in the forests. I do usually have about every hunting and fishing tag known to man kind but thats besides the point. There is absolutely no reason to prove you are not doing wrong, that's not how things work. If some ODFW official thinks you need a tag to target shoot he/she should be out of a job and off the dole.

Originally Posted by Quaka Wacka

Alright I'll go a little further (both true stories)

For those that say one tag one kill.

Imagine your hunting the bottom of a good drawn know to produce elk. You spot a herd of elk coming over the top and headed your way. With several bulls in it. You hear a gunshot from the guy above you and one bull drops. No biggie, there are two more. Now that guy shoots the two other legal bulls. And the rest of the herd runs right by you. As you aproach the guy he's calling in his buddies on he radio to tag the other two bulls.

Or

Your trying to close the distance to a bull feeding on a far hillside. Right as you get into range you here a gunshot and the bull drops. Oh well thats hunting. You go over to check out the bull and offer to help the guy get it started. As you congratulate him, he tells you its smaller than the one he shot two days ago. And this one is for his wife back in Portland.

If you tell me you still don't see a problem with this, I'm calling you a liar. Poachers steal game that you have paid to be able to hunt. No poachers means more game for everybody who follows the rules.

Hunting laws are written to make it a level playing field between you and other hunters.(and give the animals a chance) When you break those laws to get an advantage over the other hunters or take an animal that might not have been taken, Y-O-U A-R-E P-O-A-C-H-I-N-G!

Now, I'm not a big game hunter (yet) and just want to point out that what you said in this post is very true, and I don't think anyone would disagree with you about the legal and moral implications of these poachers. But there seems to be a difference between the scenarios you described here, and the father-in-law and son-in-law scenario. I'm not condoning either in the slightest, but to equate the two is a stretch. I see moral and ethical problems with what you described, but I don't with the FIL/SIL scenario - aside from it being illegal

I am from a long line of outlaws then. My family came to the Oregon territory in 1823. For generations my family has been hunting private land which has been under continuous stewardship of the family. We hunt for many reasons, meat, companionship of family and the continuation of tradition. In the pioneer days a hunting party was concerned with gathering meat, and it was a group effort for a group goal. If 12 tags are in possession, and 12 animals are tagged, I see no issue. No animal is transported on public roads without a tag affixed and that tag holder being in the vehicle. If that is morally wrong and upsets those who hold a stricter view of the law then so be it. But I would submit that there is no ethical transgression there.

I agree with QW in the scenarios he outlines. That said however,...
If a father hands his gun to his kid for the purpose of the kid making the shot, (they are obviously standing next to each other) so the kid and the father can judge whether the kid is ready to hunt, that is not poaching IMO.

40 years ago, my father did this exact thing, thinking I'd have issues. I didn't.
When it came time to field dress the buck he handed me the knife too, for the same reasons. I didn't have issues with that either. Then I had to help drag it back to the truck.
Was there something wrong with that too?

IMO, people get too hung up on the letter of the law. I know it's hard to judge one's intent, but let's try to allow for some common sense here.
In QW's scenario(s), I'd be the first one on the phone to the OSP TIP-line, for obvious reasons. But on private property, when the tagholder is present and the meat is intended for family use, I say let it slide.

New scenario, to wit:
At 4:30 P.M. on the last day of the season there is a legal, non-trophy buck standing broadside at 400 yds. It is the only buck anyone in your party has seen for the last 3 days. You are comfortable with the shot/range/weapon, but the tagholder wife/brother/dad etc. who is standing next to you isn't. The family really needs the meat, and the buck is on private property. You are there with permission, and there are no other hunters for miles.
Do you use it as a "coaching moment?" Or take the buck for the sake of guaranteed "meat in the freezer?"

Discuss (further).

Originally Posted by Quaka Wacka

And I'm sorry but I also don't get the "we live on the eastside" sense of entitlement to the game. You merely hinted to it but I do hear it a lot. I grew up on the westside, but we also grew, raised and hunted our own food

That was not my intent, point or attitude. I think rural folks would be a better word. I will say I tend to think of the west side as "city" even though it is not true.

The point was about rural living folks that live off of their back yards. Off their gardens, local orchards, local game.

Trust me I know there are "poor" folks everywhere, I see it first hand daily in my job.