The key difference between the case in question and the case that you mentioned is that there were indeedlaws broken. The guy was hunting next to a feed lot.Solid factual evidence. Not speculation. I thought it sounded fishy because I can't believe that a L.E.O. would confiscate property on the assumption that a law had been violated. Usually there are two sides to every story and we're only hearing one side from a second-hand source. Either there's more to the story that we're not hearing, or the Game Warden is playing Russian Roulette with his job. I just can't believe that a Game Warden would be that stupid. That's all. I think there's more to the story that we're not hearing.