Who's at fault, hunter or guide?

Bear Claw Chris Lappe said:
Well said, that's the part that kinda had me wondering, it would seem to me, that, that is part of what your paying him for.

But I'd hate to be the guide that crossed a big name, and in this case very loud, with a VERY loud fan base.

Since it was a repeat from last fall, I doubt there is any harm in naming the "star hunter", sadly it was "Uncle Ted". :(
Click to expand...

Ted... Ted... wasn't he the one convicted recently of game violations? Something about illegally hunting over bait? Or too young of a deer or something like that?


http://www.fieldandstream.com/blogs/hunting/2010/08/ted-nugent-busted-game-violations-california
The Feb. 9 episode showed Nugent killing a young male deer with bow and arrow near the El Dorado County town of Somerset. The wardens were alarmed because the footage appeared to show Nugent killing a "spike" buck, or one whose antlers have not yet grown long enough to fork. Killing such a young deer is illegal in California.

It also appeared to show the deer feeding on a powdery material spread on the ground before it was shot. The Department of Fish and Game launched an investigation, spokesman Patrick Foy said, which later revealed this material to be a commercial deer bait. It is illegal in California to hunt with bait."We looked at it and we just shook our heads, saying 'I can't believe he actually aired this episode,' " Foy said. "We were all really disappointed to see this happen with a guy who is a representative of hunters." Nugent was later charged with 11 misdemeanors related to events that unfolded on his own television show, Foy said.
Click to expand...
 
Codger_64 said:
Ted... Ted... wasn't he the one convicted recently of game violations? Something about illegally hunting over bait? Or too young of a deer or something like that?
Click to expand...

Yep, I believe he pled it down to a $1100.00 fine.

Which raises other questions to me, are high profile celebrity hunters like him, supposed to be setting an example???

I generally like Ted Nugent, but that incident shows a shocking lack of "doing your own homework" WAY beyond an orange camo' issue. :eek:
 
Ted has never been known for making uber-intellegent decisions. But yes, IMHO, anyone who uses his/her celeb status to promote hunting/outdoor sports has an obligation to promote responsible stewardship and ethics. Following the regulations is just one, albeit important, step in that direction.

But again I will also say... a professional hunting guide who participates in an illegal activity, or allows a client who is hunting under his license, to break regulations does not need to be a guide. Missing a substantial payday is not a valid excuse.
 
It is the responsibility of the hunter to know the fish and game laws where he is hunting. It's no different than when you or I walk out into the field in our local hunting spot. Besides, the guide can't control what the hunter does in the field. Maybe he had the correct orange required, but changed it in the field.
 
Having hunted with many guides.. I would assume the guide told the hunter. No guide worth his salt would not inform the Hunter of the state law! If it were me the guide, I would not allow a hunter to go in the field if he was not legal.

Not to get off topic.. but I will give you another situation that can get sticky..

Who is at fault the hunter or guide?

Lets say you are Brown bear hunting.. The guide see's a brown bear feeding in a stream.

He tells the hunter " It is a monster boar, shoot it"
The hunter shoots it, drops it, kills it.
A cub jumps the stream, one second after the shot
The bear is a Sow!! A sow that is wet, meaning still milking the cub..
It clearly states in the laws of that state.. shooting wet sows with cubs is against the law.
By the way.. this all occurs in a matter of 10 seconds max.
Who is at fault? The hunter or the guide?

Sorry.. I could not resist.. this really happened.. I was there.. I was NOT the shooter.
 
^that clearly is the guide's fault, especially if his role in the deal is to glass, find, and bring the hunter onto big bruins. However, I'm sure most, if not all, DWR laws are written where if you pull the trigger, you are responsible.
 
harleyguy02 said:
SNIP

Who is at fault? The hunter or the guide?

Sorry.. I could not resist.. this really happened.. I was there.. I was NOT the shooter.
Click to expand...

I'd have a hard time not putting a lot of the blame on the guide there, because that really is what your paying them for.

I could see F&W citing both though.
 
"Know your target and what is beyond..."- Ten commandments of firearms safety

"Ignorance is no defense..."

The guide told you to shoot, but you pulled the trigger. The hunter is responsible. The bear was feeding in a river, not running full tilt out off range. Either way, "caution is the greater part of valor." The guide is an idiot, and not a very good guide. The hunter should pay any fine and suffer any recriminations from the action- lose hunting rights for x years, etc. The guide should also lose his guide's license.

Well, now that we are on to hunting ethical conundrums...

You take your boy elk hunting. Both of you have cow permits. You find a likely group from which to take a cow. The boy nuzzles the rifle tight into his shoulder and takes careful aim- just like you taught him.
"Now, son, take the cow feeding by herself off to the left."
"But dad, I really want to shoot that bull."
We've only got cow permits, shoot the cow off to the left."
"Got it, dad."
Blam
The 6pt bull in the middle of the herd falls like a sack of stones.
What do you do?

The dad in this episode tagged the bull with his cow permit, turned it over to the DFG, paid the enormous fine, and suffered 5 (or 7) years without being able to hunt. The boy didn't get to keep the bull, but kept his record clean and kept his hunting rights. I don't know who he hunted with while his dad was not allowed to hunt, however. The kid was 16ish and knew better. This happened to the uncle of a good friend of mine...
 
Hi,

It isn't always black and white. I've got some Springers that have quick hard flushes. They can actually catch a pheasant that holds a split second too long. While the dog can't differentiate between rooster and hen, (hens are illegal to take), I can be held responsible for the dog if it kills a hen.

Fortunately for me, the two dogs I have that are truly capable of trapping, also have soft mouths. And I have been able to release the birds with no damage. But one day I won't be able to. What to do then?

Though one time Ring, my old female, smoked one about three feet off the ground. I thought it was a hen until I had the bird in hand. It turned out to be a very young rooster, just starting to show color. Had it been my call, I would have said it was a hen and let it pass.

dalee
 
hlee said:
The dad in this episode tagged the bull with his cow permit, turned it over to the DFG, paid the enormous fine, and suffered 5 (or 7) years without being able to hunt. The boy didn't get to keep the bull, but kept his record clean and kept his hunting rights. I don't know who he hunted with while his dad was not allowed to hunt, however. The kid was 16ish and knew better. This happened to the uncle of a good friend of mine...
Click to expand...

In this case, the dad was an idiot.

He should have let his son take the responsibility for what he willingly did and learn about direct consequences to your actions.

By covering for him and taking the blame (and tagging the bull with his tag, is lying) what lesson did he teach his son?
 
My lab, at one time, could catch quail too dumb or slow to flush quickly- so I know where you are coming from. However, as the owner of the dog, you (and I) are responsible for their behavior in the field. The dog, while a wonderful companion, is little more than a hunting implement while afield (kind of like a gun). If your flushing dogs are running in and catching the birds, then they probably need a bit more obedience/field training. At 8 years, my lab is still too high strung to be a good duck dog, though I hope to get her out in the rice fields next year. There's a level of training waiting for her that she hasn't seen in a couple of years. I know she can not wait...

For what it is worth, facloners are not responsible (according to the law) for protected birds taken by the falcon- canvas back ducks for example- during the course of normal hunting practices. At least so long as they do not take possession of the downed birds. The falcons are free to eat the "bycatch." It IS an offense if the protected birds are added to the bag...
 
Last edited:
Bear Claw Chris Lappe said:
In this case, the dad was an idiot.

He should have let his son take the responsibility for what he willingly did and learn about direct consequences to your actions.

By covering for him and taking the blame (and tagging the bull with his tag, is lying) what lesson did he teach his son?
Click to expand...

I'm right there with you. I can only report what was relayed to me. Apparently the kid and the dad did not have the greatest relationship (the kid was a spoiled, trouble making arse anyway) and the hunt was some "quality father/son time." You know, to appreciate the simple things and get him back on the straight and narrow...
 
hlee said:
You know, to appreciate the simple things and get him back on the straight and narrow...
Click to expand...

I agree with Bear Claw. Nothing would put him on the straight and narrow quicker than suffering the full penalty of the law for his wanton act.
 
hlee said:
I'm right there with you. I can only report what was relayed to me. Apparently the kid and the dad did not have the greatest relationship (the kid was a spoiled, trouble making arse anyway) and the hunt was some "quality father/son time." You know, to appreciate the simple things and get him back on the straight and narrow...
Click to expand...

It's rough to see for sure, my own family has been through it with a Nephew. His parents just kept covering for him from about 6 or 7 years old, nothing was ever his fault, every teacher "had it out for him", every cop was "a jerk that picked on him", and now at 27, (has been since 22) he is a convicted felon and the state will not even consider letting him have a driver's license until 2016.
 
hlee said:
My lab, at one time, could catch quail too dumb or slow to flush quickly- so I know where you are coming from. However, as the owner of the dog, you (and I) are responsible for their behavior in the field. The dog, while a wonderful companion, is little more than a hunting implement while afield (kind of like a gun). If your flushing dogs are running in and catching the birds, then they probably need a bit more obedience/field training. At 8 years, my lab is still too high strung to be a good duck dog, though I hope to get her out in the rice fields next year. There's a level of training waiting for her that she hasn't seen in a couple of years. I know she can not wait...

For what it is worth, facloners are not responsible (according to the law) for protected birds taken by the falcon- canvas back ducks for example- during the course of normal hunting practices. At least so long as they do not take possession of the downed birds. The falcons are free to eat the "bycatch." It IS an offense if the protected birds are added to the bag...
Click to expand...

Hi,

Do to the general heaviness of the cover, I can't see the bird to make a determination of hen or rooster. Half the time I can't even see the dog for all the thick cattails. Even though the dog maybe only a few feet away from me. And a Springer that hesitates on the flush, is useless. They need to push the bird hard and fast to keep it from simply running away into even thicker cover. I could choose run slower Springers, but they just don't produce pheasants as well as faster and quicker Springers.

I discussed this with my local DNR Officer. Technically, it is illegal. But he said he wouldn't write a citation if he saw it happen. He's trained his share of bird dogs too. And as long as you don't keep the bird, what he doesn't know about he can't do anything about.

It still bothers me though. And I do worry about it. Fortunately, wild pheasants are very difficult for any dog to trap.

dalee
 
With a "normal" hunter, I'd put the blame on both with most of it going to the guide. He's the professional and has an obligation to know the local laws. Handling under-informed clients is part of the profession. With Ted Nugent, all bets are off.

With the father and son situation, the situation is a little confused. The kid wasn't ready to be given a gun. If he's young, then dad's at fault for taking him hunting in the first place when junior could not be completely trusted. If he's old enough to know better, then the son's at fault

Edit: I didn't read as far as to see the kid was 16. It was his fault and Dad shouldn't have taken the blame. IMHO I really hope they made this kid wait to get his drivers license.
 
Last edited:
in Montana the guide or outfitter is equally responsible for any violations, in addition a guide or outfitter can be cited for failing to report a violation

right or wrong, we tend to hold guides/outfitters to a higher standard in regards to violations

in addition to any criminal penalties guides/outfitters can also be fined civilly by their Board (along w/ other possible sanctions- from probation to revocation)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top