Friday in Payson Trail Cameras

[AZLance]

.

[AZLance]

We all know Game And Fish is undermanned and underpaid... the wardens I talk to have trouble keeping up with monitoring their unit right now. They don't have time to be chasing down "illegal camera reports". unfortunately I see this as just something else that keeps them from chasing down real poachers.

[654321]

16 minutes ago, huntlines said:

Really? So just taking a picture will be considered “take” of that animal? No way a judge goes with that one. I think you are stretching the definition of take.
 

 

“Take” means pursuing, shooting, hunting, fishing, trapping, killing, capturing, snaring or netting wildlife or placing or using any net or other device or trap in a manner that may result in capturing or killing wildlife.

You drawn an elk tag in "x" unit, you put cameras up in "x" unit. AZGFD officer catches you just checking your camera and checks in data base and realizes you have an elk tag. He now rights citation for take claiming you are using camera to pursue wildlife. You now spend thousands of dollars in attorney fees hoping judge doesn't go with definition of "take." 

[654321]

10 minutes ago, AZLance said:

We all know Game And Fish is undermanned and underpaid... the wardens I talk to have trouble keeping up with monitoring their unit right now. They don't have time to be chasing down "illegal camera reports". unfortunately I see this as just something else that keeps them from chasing down real poachers.

That's exactly what bonehead777 thought.  

[Roosevelt Mark]

Exactly. 

I have cams that were given to me as gifts over the years.  I have never opened them or ever used a cam at all. Heck...I probably couldn't figure it out anyway.  I'm not knocking it but personally it has no effect on what I do.

[Desertguide]

4 minutes ago, 654321 said:

“Take” means pursuing, shooting, hunting, fishing, trapping, killing, capturing, snaring or netting wildlife or placing or using any net or other device or trap in a manner that may result in capturing or killing wildlife.

You drawn an elk tag in "x" unit, you put cameras up in "x" unit. AZGFD officer catches you just checking your camera and checks in data base and realizes you have an elk tag. He now rights citation for take claiming you are using camera to pursue wildlife. You now spend thousands of dollars in attorney fees hoping judge doesn't go with definition of "take." 

Good point

[huntlines]

26 minutes ago, 654321 said:

“Take” means pursuing, shooting, hunting, fishing, trapping, killing, capturing, snaring or netting wildlife or placing or using any net or other device or trap in a manner that may result in capturing or killing wildlife.

You drawn an elk tag in "x" unit, you put cameras up in "x" unit. AZGFD officer catches you just checking your camera and checks in data base and realizes you have an elk tag. He now rights citation for take claiming you are using camera to pursue wildlife. You now spend thousands of dollars in attorney fees hoping judge doesn't go with definition of "take." 

That’s a lot of assumptions and work for a warden who is already too busy to do their normal duties. Pursuing wildlife is a stretch and you know it. 
Attorney won’t be needed for a violation like this. 

[Desertguide]

The problem is the same people writing the rules are the same ones writing the definitions. If they say taking a picture of an animal is "pursuing" then it is. 

[HuntHarder]

14 minutes ago, huntlines said:

That’s a lot of assumptions and work for a warden who is already too busy to do their normal duties. Pursuing wildlife is a stretch and you know it. 
Attorney won’t be needed for a violation like this. 

Apparently you have never been charged with a wildlife violation or know anyone who has..  The process is relentless and like any other litigation, it will drag on.  

[AZBIG10]

if I take a picture of a wolf. Did I take it?

[Desertguide]

14 minutes ago, AZBIG10 said:

if I take a picture of a wolf. Did I take it?

Nope. If you killed that wolf and you had a picture of it, I can promise you under this possible rule, you'd be charged with using a camera to aid in the take of wildlife. Along with a bunch of federal stuff

[AZLance]

1 hour ago, 654321 said:

That's exactly what bonehead777 thought.  

so they're not undermanned or underpaid?

[654321]

Just now, AZLance said:

so they're not undermanned or underpaid?

They're definitely undermanned as for underpaid their starting salaries are getting pretty close to what other law enforcement agencies start at except they don't get all that overtime pay and every  WM has a minimum of a Bachelor of Science degree.  But lets face it the majority of their cases are because of solid tips from the public and there is no shortage of that in the hills these days and many hunters will be more than happy to help AZGFD with the trail camera rule change.

[wildwoody]

ThomC please don't come to Payson. And g&f right it and let the judge who hates g&f violations throws the book at you.

Example guy in unit 27 doing the archery hunt, had to drive thru part of unit not in season to get to part which is open. Gets pulled over by game officer . He asked  the hunter who has bow in case if he can see it and take a picture with the hunter holding it. Then proceeds to charge him with hunting in a closed unit. 

[huntlines]

12 hours ago, HuntHarder said:

Apparently you have never been charged with a wildlife violation or know anyone who has..  The process is relentless and like any other litigation, it will drag on.  

Penalties are meant to be a deterrent but we have prisons overflowing indicating that doesn’t work. People don’t even bat an eye at misdemeanors anymore. No one is scared of the process and that’s “IF” they are caught.