Costly mistake, hunter shoots "-" sheep

[Couzer]

Just saw this on FB, be aware of your target!!!!

 

http://www.dailyinterlake.com/article/20161222/ARTICLE/161229951

 

On Oct. 28, the Kalispell hunter was convicted by Thompson Falls Justice of the Peace Donald M. Strine of illegally killing two bighorn sheep during a hunting trip in the Knowles Creek area. He says that it was an honest mistake, but one that still wound up costing him more than $32,000 in fines after he self-reported the incident.

 

Nobody draws a sheep tag you waited 30 years for and ends up killing three animals intentionally, Fleming said in an interview Monday.

 

On Oct. 28, Fleming was tracking a herd of bighorn sheep at Knowles Creek with his friend and a fellow Kalispell hunter, Brad Borden, when he sighted on a trophy ram.

 

I took a shot at my ram, but as soon as I shot that ram, I didnt know it at the time, it fell into a depression where I couldnt see it, Fleming said. He reloaded, peered back through his scope and saw what appeared to be the same animal. Im sure hes wounded, so I shoot him again. When I walked up the hill, I cant tell you how shocked I was to see three bighorn sheep lying there.

 

The second bullet had passed through the second ram and struck an ewe standing in the brush behind it, killing it with a shot to the throat.

 

Borden then called the game warden, who upon investigating the scene, told the two men that the evidence appeared to corroborate their story. Fleming said the warden even helped the hunters pack out the meat, allowing him to keep the first ram.

 

He told me, I gotta charge you for taking a ram, but I cant charge you for taking an ewe, Fleming recalled. I just thought I was going to pay a fine. I never thought Id lose my license.

 

Fleming pleaded guilty to the offenses. As restitution to the state, he must pay $30,000 for the second ram and $2,000 for the ewe, in addition to a $735 fine for hunting over the limit. He also lost his hunting, trapping and fishing privileges for 30 months.

 

Judge Strine said in an interview with the Daily Inter Lake that although the game warden corroborated Flemings account of the sheep killings, the law gives him no leeway on restitution for those convicted of illegally harvesting animals.

 

The law says shall, not may, so that pretty much takes the discretion away from the judge, Strine said. But he added that he could have suspended Flemings sportsman privileges for considerably longer than he did.

 

Strine also said he allowed Fleming to make the payments in installments, citing the accidental nature of the crime.

 

RELYING ON information from a story in the Sanders County Ledger, a Daily Inter Lake news brief in its Monday Regional Roundup referred to Fleming as poacher, which he said compounded his poor luck by tarnishing his reputation in his home town.

 

Poaching is not legally defined under Montana law, and is instead a more generalized term. Fish, Wildlife and Parks game warden Capt. Lee Anderson said he typically reserves the word for those who illegally kill wildlife with intent.

 

I generally only use the term for folks that do it purposefully and knowingly, Anderson said. ... We try to work with guys as much as we can, and then its up to the judge to decide what kind of penalty he wants to levy.

 

Ultimately, Strine said the responsibility rests with Fleming, regardless of whether the circumstances were unfortunate.

 

If youre gonna go out in the woods with a rifle, you better know the law and what youre going to shoot at, and what youre not going to shoot at, Strine said.

 

While Fleming disagreed with the charges, he said he appreciated the wardens credulity after Borden called in the incident. Still, he feels that a judge should have some leeway when sentencing someone who had no intention to break the law.

 

As a hunter, there should be an incentive for every hunter to do the right thing and the honest thing, which is to report yourself, he said. They shouldnt throw the book at an honest hunter. Ive never had a hunting violation in my life and Ive never had a criminal history.

 

Reporter Sam Wilson can be reached at 758-4407 or by email at swilson@dailyinterlake.com.

[AzDiamondHeat]

Ouch.

 

Where was his friend and why was he not spotting one wonders.

 

It really doesn't set a good precedent for self reporting though. I think a true hunter still would, but dang.

[Coach]

The hunter certainly did the right thing by self reporting. I'm on the fence a little on this one as to whether the penalty was too harsh. I hate to see a guy get the book thrown at him when he was 100% up front and honest. That said, 3 bighorn sheep, dead...time to face the fiddler I suppose. But there's so many guys who would never have reported it and just walked away with their trophy. I get that he was incredibly irresponsible but I think I would have tried to be a little lenient because he was so honest.

[northAZarcher]

Well, at least the judge was kind enough to allow him to pay 32,000 back in installments! That was awful nice of him!!!!

[Big Browns]

I'm definitely on the fence about this one. I'm more concerned with the president it sets for future violations. I think this ruling will possibly cause more harm than good!

[AZbowhntr]

Ouch. That almost happened to me last year on the Kaibab. You have to wonder how that would play out in the future if it ever happened again. Not sure he would be so quick to come forward.

[218buck]

I wonder if he new that he was still going to get fined and lose his license if he would have reported the accident makes you wonder . Tried to do right but still got convicted what are other hunters going to do if this happens to them?

[stanley]

Hunter appears to be a stand-up guy, IMO. He screwed-up, and then did what was obviously the right thing by self reporting.

 

Regarding the penalty, there can be many things in play there. I don't necessarily see it as the judge throwing the book at the guy. For all we know, the judge did not have authority to reduce the fine. Maye mandatory penalties were in play. Not saying this was the case, just saying that I don't know the law there. For all we know, the penalty could have been much steeper had he not self reported and then got busted after the fact..... I also don't agree with the comments regarding whether this will reduce the likelihood of folks self reporting in the future or not. My sense is that 'self reporters' will generally do so anyway, because that is what they do! Strong morals and a conscience will generally drive someone's decision, IMO.

 

Either way, + one on Vowell's original comment! Be sure of your target and beyond!

 

S.

[rossislider]

Guy messed up, but did the right thing after recognizing his mistake. I think the treatment he got was a bit excessive in light of the self reporting. I also have a problem with the "poacher" label he got.

[DCS]

This can go either way,I personally know a case of a guide here on the website that had a client that shot at a sheep here in Az,he told him to not shoot,and the hunter went ahead,and shot.Two dead rams,called game and fish,took care of both sheep,game and fish officer went to bat in front of the JP,and the hunter was fined a small amount,and he was awarded his ram,and G&F took the other ram.Mistakes do happen.

[ready2hunt]

Terrible judicial judgement. This is why so many people will never self report.

[ThomC]

A perfect example of catch 22 with laws. If a sheep is worth $32,000, then why dont we have a bounty on Lions that are eating $32, 000 sheep. If a poacher kills a sheep then he should pay a fine and $32,000 sounds good. The guy and his friend made a mistake but I do not think that the two hunters were poaching. Since the hunters did not profit from the second and third sheep then its is an honest mistake and the fine should be smaller.

These mandatory sentences were put in place because activist judges were letting dishonest poachers go.

 

Our G&F has lately changed their rulings because of this problem, but I think that the commissions only discretion is the length of the loss of the license.

 

Remember the Rabbit and the Commissioner story.

[Non-Typical Solutions]

One thing I have seen and feel is important....if you shoot you need to go check before you shoot again....thus saving yourself of an incident like this.......tough deal for sure.

[trophyseeker]

The way I read it, once he pleaded guilty to illegally taking wildlife, which he obviously did, the fines became MANDATORY under the law as written. Many laws are written with mandatory punishments included that keep a judge from using his discretion. Set amounts of mandatory jail time for minimal amounts of grass in one's possession, have been a hot topic over the last few years.

 

 

"Fleming pleaded guilty to the offenses. As restitution to the state, he must pay $30,000 for the second ram and $2,000 for the ewe, in addition to a $735 fine for hunting over the limit. He also lost his hunting, trapping and fishing privileges for 30 months.

Judge Strine said in an interview with the Daily Inter Lake that although the game warden corroborated Flemings account of the sheep killings, the law gives him no leeway on restitution for those convicted of illegally harvesting animals.

The law says shall, not may, so that pretty much takes the discretion away from the judge, Strine said. But he added that he could have suspended Flemings sportsman privileges for considerably longer than he did."

[dusty]

“Prosecutorial discretion” is the authority of an agency or officer to decide what charges to bring and how to pursue each case.A little common sense would be to dismiss the 30,000 2nd ram charge for self reporting.Charge him 2,000 for the ewe,735 for over the limit and 30 months loss of privilages.