CouseforLife Report post Posted September 29, 2009 I could not live myself if it was suffering. I would call the local G&F officer and explain it and even ask him to accompany me if he wished. But I would not let it suffer even if that meant getting a citation. I would explain it the judge and hopefully it get thrown out. If the G&F Commission wants to suspend my priveleages for my humane and morally correct actions, then I think we need to rethink and do something about how G&F Commission rules work. Just my opinion. Suffering I mean after it was left overnight. I totally agree with leaving overnight but after 12 hours or so if it has not died and needs to be dispatched, that is my definition of the suffering. Letting it continue to try and die throughout the day and not being able to dispatch it is unethical IMO. We as sportsman have an obligation to make the death as swift as we can and do all we can to eliminate the suffering. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
catclaw Report post Posted September 30, 2009 I could not live myself if it was suffering. I would call the local G&F officer and explain it and even ask him to accompany me if he wished. But I would not let it suffer even if that meant getting a citation. I would explain it the judge and hopefully it get thrown out. If the G&F Commission wants to suspend my priveleages for my humane and morally correct actions, then I think we need to rethink and do something about how G&F Commission rules work. Just my opinion. Suffering I mean after it was left overnight. I totally agree with leaving overnight but after 12 hours or so if it has not died and needs to be dispatched, that is my definition of the suffering. Letting it continue to try and die throughout the day and not being able to dispatch it is unethical IMO. We as sportsman have an obligation to make the death as swift as we can and do all we can to eliminate the suffering. The commission we have now would suspend you for leaving a candy bar wrapper on the ground by your stand- I wouldn't trust them with something that significant. If the animals is still alive that long after the shot, you don't deserve to tag it. Our game and fish laws by and large are quite archaic. Many of them allow NO discretion whatsoever to the wildlife managers. They state that if....such and such happens and it comes to the attention of a WM and he/she does not arrest you, then THEY are guilty! With laws like that on the books, I wouldn't dream of finishing one off the day after. I would still pack my pistol, but wouldn't shoot it unless it charged me. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GameHauler Report post Posted September 30, 2009 I could not live myself if it was suffering. I would call the local G&F officer and explain it and even ask him to accompany me if he wished. But I would not let it suffer even if that meant getting a citation. I would explain it the judge and hopefully it get thrown out. If the G&F Commission wants to suspend my priveleages for my humane and morally correct actions, then I think we need to rethink and do something about how G&F Commission rules work. Just my opinion. Suffering I mean after it was left overnight. I totally agree with leaving overnight but after 12 hours or so if it has not died and needs to be dispatched, that is my definition of the suffering. Letting it continue to try and die throughout the day and not being able to dispatch it is unethical IMO. We as sportsman have an obligation to make the death as swift as we can and do all we can to eliminate the suffering. The commission we have now would suspend you for leaving a candy bar wrapper on the ground by your stand- I wouldn't trust them with something that significant. If the animals is still alive that long after the shot, you don't deserve to tag it. Our game and fish laws by and large are quite archaic. Many of them allow NO discretion whatsoever to the wildlife managers. They state that if....such and such happens and it comes to the attention of a WM and he/she does not arrest you, then THEY are guilty! With laws like that on the books, I wouldn't dream of finishing one off the day after. I would still pack my pistol, but wouldn't shoot it unless it charged me. UM! I really am going to bite my tongue right now as I have been taking my pain meds I mostly disagree with your post. The WM's can make a call and they do based on the situation. Most are GREAT people and love hunting and GOOD hunters I grow very tired of people bashing the Dept but the folks in the field are for the most part GREAT. NO, I do not agree with alot of the Commissions views and decisions and we have to be willing to send Emails or go to meetings to change that, Not just posting on a web site that they would write you for dropping a wrapper Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bowsniper Report post Posted September 30, 2009 I hate to say this, but I really believe it, "what ever you do, do not trust in AZ G&F". Mark Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
azbownunter22 Report post Posted September 30, 2009 Your hunt is OVER. If you find the bull running around you can't shoot him again. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
catclaw Report post Posted September 30, 2009 Mike, I swear you are a retard sometimes. I was making the point that the WM are good guys for the most part but that their hands are tied by the stupid laws. You have obviously never read title 17 and have no grasp of criminal law in Arizona-especially when it comes to culpability. Like I said, I don't trust the current commission one bit. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Blackcats06 Report post Posted October 2, 2009 Bowsniper, What has lead you down the road to not trusting in the Game and Fish Department? Just curious as I think they do better than some states and have less to work with. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bustedknuckleinc Report post Posted October 2, 2009 what are the chances of the G&F warden being out in the field the day after the season, heck I dont even see them during the season... +1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GameHauler Report post Posted October 3, 2009 Your hunt is OVER. If you find the bull running around you can't shoot him again. I totally agree if your critter is running around it is OVER and I think most thought/meant one that is laying there with their liver or what ever killing them in a slow death. It is the suffering that EATS at you if you have ever wounded one. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
catclaw Report post Posted October 3, 2009 Anything in title 17, title 13, or any other title is the Letter of the Law. Every officer in the state is taught from the beginning that there is a difference in letter of the law and spirit of the law. While letter of the law is very clear, each officer should enforce it according to the spirit of the law which allows for discretion based upon each circumstance. That is why one officer will cite you while another officer will not for doing the same thing. Some officers lose sight of the Spirit of the Law. WRONG This is what you don't get. Many of the title 17 laws specifically state that in less words, that if a Wildlife Manager chooses to use discretion and give you a warning, he, himself, is now guilty of a crime! Titles 13 and 28, the other two commonly enforced laws by Law Enforcement, don't have those provisions. And to make it worse, almost all the laws in title 17 are "strict liability" which means if you did it, you are guilty as opposed to typical title 13 and 28 laws which add culpability into the mix. For example, if you trip over a log and your gun goes off and shoots a doe, you are GUILTY of whatever host of violations you can think of; big game out of season, antlerless in an antlered season, exceeding the bag limit and so on. In title 13 (criminal statutes) you have to have some level of culpability- usually the minimum is reckless. If you applied this standard in title 17 they would have to show that you were either Reckless in your actions that caused whatever violation or you did it knowingly or intentionally. If you took careful aim at a deer, with nothing but and empty hill behind you and shot the deer but the bullet went clear through and hit a grapefruit sized rock on the hill, riccocheted off and hit another deer that was 50yds away and completely out of your possible view, you would be guilty of exceeding the bag limit and possibly other violations under current title 17 rules. If there were levels of culpability applied, they would have to show two things; that you in fact killed the second deer and that your actions were reckless... Add no allowance for judgement on top of this, and you have a pretty screwed up system with respect to game laws in Arizona. This is why I would NEVER turn myself in if something like this happened. You are going to get screwed big-time. Don't blame the WMs, most of them I have encountered are good folks. I met a very lazy one in 24A a few years ago but that was the exception and not the norm. Blame our ridiculous title 17... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Couescrazy33 Report post Posted October 3, 2009 ARS 17-309.11 states that it is unlawful to take any kind of game out of season. guily of a class 1 misdemeanor. ARS 17-309.E states that if azgfd does not enforce the law is guilty of a class 2 misdemeanor. in the begining of ARS chapter 13 u have the "Letter of the Law" and "spirit of the law" Also statue of limitations for a misdemeanor is a year long. also this senario is not specified in ARS.. but im imagining 17-309.11 is talking about poaching not killing a wounded animal. now take it for what its worth but if a WM says he is ok with it.... he is practicing his spirit of the law. it all depends of the officer. Think if your local police department practiced letter of the law. anyone driving 20+ over the speed limit would go to jail. same with all the other laws. i agree with gamehauler tho.....not going to let it suffer if its dying a slow death. i would hope azgfd would agree. i wouldnt care if they shot it and donated the meat but just dont let the animal suffer. all of ARS is online at arizona revised statues .com Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
308Nut Report post Posted October 7, 2009 IMHO moral law comes before mans law. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
