View Poll Results: A poll
Voters: 50. You may not vote on this poll
Who Should Get the Deer - Hunter or Deer Farm Operator?
05-04-2007 | 01:11 PM
#31
Nontypical Buck
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,520
Likes: 0
From: Southern MD
RE: Who Should Get the Deer - Hunter or Deer Farm Operator?
ORIGINAL: Germ
They are not domesticated IMO, they just tolerate humans. The question is could a deer escape from a farm survie in the wild? I think instinct would take over and they could. If Predator populations are high than I do not think they could. The learning curve is way to long for them.
They are not domesticated IMO, they just tolerate humans. The question is could a deer escape from a farm survie in the wild? I think instinct would take over and they could. If Predator populations are high than I do not think they could. The learning curve is way to long for them.
05-04-2007 | 01:19 PM
#32
Nontypical Buck
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,520
Likes: 0
From: Southern MD
RE: Who Should Get the Deer - Hunter or Deer Farm Operator?
ORIGINAL: Paul L Mohr
Well I would say the difference is I don't hunt peoples dogs or tree stands. I didn't set out with the intention of taking your dog or tree stand with a legal right to do so. And if I found someone else's tree stand in my woods or property I had permission to hunt your darn right I would keep it. If it was public land I would probably just leave it there.
Now if I saw that an animal had a tag before I shot it it might be different. I would probably pass on that animal and maybe call who I thought it belonged to. But once I shoot it under legal terms I am probably going to keep it.
Ok, so lets say the guy should give it back, someone owned it and it's his. That would mean the owner is responsible for that animal. I say the hunter should be compensated for his time, cost of the ammo he wasted on shooting it, the tag he wasted and the amount it cost to have it processed since it was warm out. Oh, and heck lets throw in mental anguish of losing that trophy
. I guess the owner shouldn't have to pay for the mount since it was obvious it belonged to someone else and he shouldn't have done it. But that raises the question, if he wants the mount, shouldn't he have to pay for it?
The hunter in my opinion has no obligation to pay the owner since it was taken in a legal means. He did not steel the animal off of the guys property and it was not premeditated. As the owner of the animal you have the obligation to keep them on your property, not the other way around.
We could argue this for days if you would like. I suppose it would be easier to just agree that you feel differently about it.
Paul
Well I would say the difference is I don't hunt peoples dogs or tree stands. I didn't set out with the intention of taking your dog or tree stand with a legal right to do so. And if I found someone else's tree stand in my woods or property I had permission to hunt your darn right I would keep it. If it was public land I would probably just leave it there.
Now if I saw that an animal had a tag before I shot it it might be different. I would probably pass on that animal and maybe call who I thought it belonged to. But once I shoot it under legal terms I am probably going to keep it.
Ok, so lets say the guy should give it back, someone owned it and it's his. That would mean the owner is responsible for that animal. I say the hunter should be compensated for his time, cost of the ammo he wasted on shooting it, the tag he wasted and the amount it cost to have it processed since it was warm out. Oh, and heck lets throw in mental anguish of losing that trophy
. I guess the owner shouldn't have to pay for the mount since it was obvious it belonged to someone else and he shouldn't have done it. But that raises the question, if he wants the mount, shouldn't he have to pay for it?The hunter in my opinion has no obligation to pay the owner since it was taken in a legal means. He did not steel the animal off of the guys property and it was not premeditated. As the owner of the animal you have the obligation to keep them on your property, not the other way around.
We could argue this for days if you would like. I suppose it would be easier to just agree that you feel differently about it.
Paul
You do not seem to accept that the law considers owned animals property, just like a tree stand or tv.
And you are probably right, the farmer should have to compensate the hunter to some degree but as far as mental anguish for losing a trophy? Is a farm raised deer really a trophy?
I never said the hunter was obligated to do anything but return the deer (property).
05-04-2007 | 01:22 PM
#33
Thread Starter
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 676
Likes: 0
From: Central Minnesota
RE: Who Should Get the Deer - Hunter or Deer Farm Operator?
"But that brings up another issue. If hand raised farm deer with no fear of humans, heck they actually look tohumans for food, were to escape due to a tree falling on the fence (or bear breaking it), are they still game animals? Even with a monster rack? Or are the domesticated farm animals? "
I believe they could go "wild." People from the city drop cats and dogs off in the country where I live all the time and they go wild, hunting and sometimes even threatening and attacking people. They're not the same fun-loving pets their owners once knew.
And whoever said we could argue back and forth on this all day is right. It's good to have different viewpoints and as long as no one gets personal, its fun to debate such real world and hypothetical situations.
I believe they could go "wild." People from the city drop cats and dogs off in the country where I live all the time and they go wild, hunting and sometimes even threatening and attacking people. They're not the same fun-loving pets their owners once knew.
And whoever said we could argue back and forth on this all day is right. It's good to have different viewpoints and as long as no one gets personal, its fun to debate such real world and hypothetical situations.
05-04-2007 | 01:26 PM
#34
Nontypical Buck
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 2,849
Likes: 0
From: Southwest Ohio
RE: Who Should Get the Deer - Hunter or Deer Farm Operator?
Would I give it back? No, I wouldn't. A dog I would automatically assume was someone's pet and might shoot it depending because I don't like dogs that people let run wild. They are basically coyotes at that point.A tiger I would shoot no question and then call the game warden (I do not want that thing around my farm sneaking through the corn with my son playing in the yard). If it were an elk I would know that it just escaped from somewhere and I would let it go and call DNR. But a deer... how am I supposed to know that it just broke out of someone's pen? If it had a big tag in its ear I would just think that it was tagged by the DNR to be honest with you. I don't know, it certainly is a weird occurrance.
05-04-2007 | 01:35 PM
#35
Thread Starter
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 676
Likes: 0
From: Central Minnesota
RE: Who Should Get the Deer - Hunter or Deer Farm Operator?
One more comment and then I'll drop this. But I hardly think there is a consensus - even among legal professionals - that this would be case closed from a civil court standpoint:
"The crux of the legal argument appears to be this: Is the head of deer No. 27 considered a body part of legal livestock and is thus private property of the Krumwiedes? Or did deer No. 27 become fair legal game when it wandered onto public land?
"The question of the tag will be fascinating,'' said Ted Lundrigan, an attorney in private practice in Pine River. "And once it's dead, what's the value of the head?"
He said a civil court judge would have to weigh other issues, such as whether the deer had become feral after it escaped and whether Keefe could have known the deer was tame.
Given that the deer had only a small yellow ear tag and had wandered far from the Krumwiede farm, Lundrigan said the case favors the hunter. "
"The crux of the legal argument appears to be this: Is the head of deer No. 27 considered a body part of legal livestock and is thus private property of the Krumwiedes? Or did deer No. 27 become fair legal game when it wandered onto public land?
"The question of the tag will be fascinating,'' said Ted Lundrigan, an attorney in private practice in Pine River. "And once it's dead, what's the value of the head?"
He said a civil court judge would have to weigh other issues, such as whether the deer had become feral after it escaped and whether Keefe could have known the deer was tame.
Given that the deer had only a small yellow ear tag and had wandered far from the Krumwiede farm, Lundrigan said the case favors the hunter. "
05-04-2007 | 02:07 PM
#37
Boone & Crockett
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 11,682
Likes: 0
From: Michigan/Ohio
RE: Who Should Get the Deer - Hunter or Deer Farm Operator?
ORIGINAL: HuntingBry
Maybe the hunter should just keep the deer and return the tag.
Maybe the hunter should just keep the deer and return the tag.
05-04-2007 | 05:12 PM
#38
Nontypical Buck
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 4,701
Likes: 0
From: Wadena, MN
RE: Who Should Get the Deer - Hunter or Deer Farm Operator?
A pheasent gets away from the game farm and I shoot it 1 mile away in my road ditch, whos is it? I need a license and a stamp to shoot it, its mine bottom line! This deal happened about 70 miles up the road I heard all about it. Whinney nature freaks, I would have sent them a roast!
05-05-2007 | 08:38 PM
#39
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
From:
RE: Who Should Get the Deer - Hunter or Deer Farm Operator?
IMHO:
1)If the farmer was still actively searching for the escaped deer: the deerwas still the property (albeit lost property) of the farmer, and the hunter does not own the deer's remains. In this situation, the hunter's ignoranceof the farmer's ownership of the deer, the deer'sescape and ongoing evasion of the farmerdoes nottransfer ownership of the deer from the farmer to the hunter.
2) If the farmer was not still actively searching for the escaped deer: the deer has been legally abandoned by the farmer, and sincea deeris a game animal anyonewho legallyharvests it owns it.
Accordingly, the critical question is whether the farmer was still actively searching for the deer or had abandoned it. If there is a lawsuit, it will be up to the court to decide whether the deer had been abandoned by the farmer by weighing whatever relevant facts arepresented at trial by each party. It'll be a total judgment call by the court.
Also, in scenario #1, the hunter did nothing wrong since he did notknown that the deer was owned by the farmer (i.e., he did not see the ear tag until after he had shot the deer) and so heshould not be required to compensate the farmer for destroying the farmer's property. In scenario #2, whether the hunter saw the ear tag before shooting is moot.
Just my2/100 of a dollar.
--twofer
1)If the farmer was still actively searching for the escaped deer: the deerwas still the property (albeit lost property) of the farmer, and the hunter does not own the deer's remains. In this situation, the hunter's ignoranceof the farmer's ownership of the deer, the deer'sescape and ongoing evasion of the farmerdoes nottransfer ownership of the deer from the farmer to the hunter.
2) If the farmer was not still actively searching for the escaped deer: the deer has been legally abandoned by the farmer, and sincea deeris a game animal anyonewho legallyharvests it owns it.
Accordingly, the critical question is whether the farmer was still actively searching for the deer or had abandoned it. If there is a lawsuit, it will be up to the court to decide whether the deer had been abandoned by the farmer by weighing whatever relevant facts arepresented at trial by each party. It'll be a total judgment call by the court.
Also, in scenario #1, the hunter did nothing wrong since he did notknown that the deer was owned by the farmer (i.e., he did not see the ear tag until after he had shot the deer) and so heshould not be required to compensate the farmer for destroying the farmer's property. In scenario #2, whether the hunter saw the ear tag before shooting is moot.
Just my2/100 of a dollar.
--twofer
05-06-2007 | 12:15 PM
#40
Nontypical Buck
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,188
Likes: 0
From: Balt, MD (orig: J-town,PA) The bowels of Hell!!!
RE: Who Should Get the Deer - Hunter or Deer Farm Operator?
The biggest problem I see here is the overwhelming willingness of people to sue or to go to court over everything.
As for the comparison to dogs. Some dogs will go to anyone for companionship. Others would hide from everyone but the owner. The comparison ends there. Almost all wild animals as soon as they are released become feral very quickly. If the animal was that tame it would not have traveled that far away. It would have stayed around the farm.
I highly doubt that this animal is as domesticated as a dog becomes or even was considered a pet by the owners.If it was that domesticated. Isn't it a good thing it was shot that quickly after it escaped?
The owners should jsut let it go. The hunter was showing them respect by calling them and they should just leave italone.
As for the comparison to dogs. Some dogs will go to anyone for companionship. Others would hide from everyone but the owner. The comparison ends there. Almost all wild animals as soon as they are released become feral very quickly. If the animal was that tame it would not have traveled that far away. It would have stayed around the farm.
I highly doubt that this animal is as domesticated as a dog becomes or even was considered a pet by the owners.If it was that domesticated. Isn't it a good thing it was shot that quickly after it escaped?
The owners should jsut let it go. The hunter was showing them respect by calling them and they should just leave italone.
