http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/201...us_people_ted_nugent


MARYSVILLE, Calif. – Ted Nugent says he should have been better informed about California game laws after pleading no contest to misdemeanor charges of deer-baiting.

Nugent said on his website Wednesday that he takes full responsibility for the hunting incident televised on a February episode of his Outdoor Channel hunting show.

California game wardens watching the show saw Nugent kill an immature buck during the hunt in Northern California. Investigators found that the deer had been eating bait before being killed.

Baiting wildlife is illegal in California.

Nugent pleaded no contest last week to baiting the deer and not having a properly signed hunting tag. A Yuba County Superior Court judge ordered Nugent to pay a $1,750 fine.

He admitted to the mistake, pled no contest, paid his fine and didn't whine about it. I say he handled it like a man.

Game laws and their interpretation differ in many states and sometimes lead to confusion by the hunter. It's not like he was shooting elk from a helicopter or something serious like that. I think that calling him a poacher is excessive. He paid his fine, he's square with the state of California that should end it.

I'll admit to not having a "properly" signed tag about half the time.

Rock star Nugent fined for baiting deer on TV show

August 13, 2010 11:19:00 PM
By Rob Young/Appeal-Democrat


Rock star and gun rights advocate Ted Nugent was fined $1,750 Friday in Yuba County Superior Court after pleading no contest to a charge of baiting deer on his hunting show "Spirit of the Wild."

Yuba City attorney Jack Kopp, representing Theodore Anthony Nugent, entered the plea to Department of Fish and Game charges of baiting deer and not having a deer tag "countersigned" at the closest possible location, said Deputy District Attorney John Vacek.

Nugent, who did not appear in court, also illegally shot an immature buck on the show but was not charged, according to Fish and Game.

Baiting deer is legal in some states but not in California, said department spokesman Patrick Foy. Baiting supplies are sold at some outdoor stores, he said.

The deer was killed in El Dorado County toward the end of deer hunting season last fall but brought to Yuba County. Two co-defendants, Mitchell Neil Moore and Ross Albert Patterson, live in Yuba County, said Vacek.

Moore was a photographer on the Outdoor Channel show. Patterson, who pleaded no contest to taking an animal with bait, actively spread bait called "C'mere Deer." His family owns the El Dorado County property where the hunt took place, said Foy.

Two deer were killed after being baited, said Vacek.

Moore and Patterson also were represented by Kopp and did not appear in court. Moore, who pleaded no contest to possessing an animal illegally, was fined $700. Patterson was fined $1,225.

Judge James F. Dawson ordered all three men to pay the fines by Oct. 1.

Nugent was originally facing a charge of killing a "spike" — an immature buck — on the program, but the charge was dropped during negotiations between his attorney and the Yuba County District Attorney's Office, said Foy.

A spike is a deer with two antlers that have not yet "forked," Foy said.

A Fish and Game warden saw the show in March and "just about fell out of his chair" when he saw Nugent with the buck, according to Foy.

A subsequent investigation led to the baiting charge. A search warrant was served in April at Moore's home in Yuba County, said Foy.

Nugent was "very cooperative" when contacted in March after the show aired, Foy said.

Fish and Game decided to treat Nugent as it would any other violator and so did not issue a press release when the charges were filed Aug. 6, Foy said.

Kopp declined comment as he left the courtroom.

A Nugent assistant at "Tedquarters" in Jackson, Mich., Linda Peterson, and his music management firm, McGhee Entertainment, had no comment.

Nugent is on a concert tour, including several stops in California, according to his website.

A Nugent biography on the website activemusician.com calls him "an outspoken advocate of hunting and gun ownership rights and the owner of 350 guns himself."

Nugent has served on the National Rifle Association's board of directors since 1995 and has had a long adversarial relationship with the animal rights movement, according to the biography.

I figure old sweaty teddy made some misjudgment & mistake; but I also figure everyone of us has done the same in some way or another with all the regulations to catch ya doing this or that, ha.

Sure glad I call Alaska home just the same. Nobody throws around poacher on anybody; it's called subsistence; and the Indians just hunt whenever they want, 24/7. Actually, F&G violations are very low priority in rural areas. I remember a couple years back, some federal park guy tried telling the Indians they couldn't shoot ducks after ice out; big tradition. They just ignored him and he quickly realized how little authority he really had with people who could care less what he had to say.

I just wish F&G up here would concentrate more on getting some elk all over Alaska than violations.

I'm not a huge "Nuge" fan. Being a somewhat bland and laid back individual, Ted is somewhat "over the top" for my tastes. In the last year I have turned off the hunting channels. Too many commercials and too much emphasis on trophy taking, and too much celebratory nonsense after the kill for this ol' fart.
However, having said that, It seems to me that some folks sure have it in for ol' Ted. Guess when you are at the top, folks want to bring you down.
Maybe if he was a sodomite or a serial rapist or ran an abortion mill,he would fare better in the eye of the public. Somehow, I don't think labeling the guy as a "poacher" for this incident is correct. But he sure has given himself a black eye.
Best
GWB

I doubt the average "poacher" gets caught by airing his hunt on TV. Ted made a mistake and violated the hunting rules. Does not make him a poacher.

BigB

Does uncle Ted ever play by the rules?

ok now for some real news??? anyone have any reall news??

quote:

Originally posted by onefunzr2:
Does uncle Ted ever play by the rules?

He does play a mean guitar though...

Jeff

Kalifonia, has WAY too many rules

YAWN

Baiting deer SHOULD be illegal in all 50 states, not just California. Ted knows the rules and should follow them.

To make it more complicated, C'Meer Deer is not a bait in many states that do not allow baiting. Missouri comes to mind.

Why people have such a hard-on over this amazes me. Someone involved in this hunt should have known better. Lesson learned.

He paid his fine, didn't throw his weight around, and is moving on. Anybody notice he paid a higher fine than the others involved? Get over it.

This incident highlights the complexity of our game laws. I routinely hunt five or more states each year, and try very hard to comply with all the little technicalities. It isn't easy. It takes an inordinate amount of effort to stay up to date. I've never had any problems or been cited on a hunt, but that doesn't mean I've managed to follow every little rule. Hunting DIY, there is no guide or outfitter to "help" me.
I remember my first bowhunt in Ontario, where I showed up without a soft case for my bow. (I flew and used a hard case for transport.) My friend informed me on the first day of the hunt that it was illegal to walk out of the woods in the dark without having my bow cased. In all my study of the regs I never found this rule, yet my friend had been cited before for this violation, and apparently this is a common custom in some eastern locales. It sure would be met with howls of protest in the western US.

Calling someone a poacher for violating this type of technicality, or going to the game check station in the wrong county is being overly provacative. We should all do our best to follow all the rules, and hunt both legaly and ethically. If caught in some technicality, pay the fine, learn the lesson, and move on.

Bill

Baiting is illegal in Alabama. But during hunting season businesses such as Walmart, convenience stores, gas stations, etc. are full of corn to be sold to hunters. That's not counting corn sold to hunters during season by feed stores. It's not unusual to see hunters headed to the woods in season with a truck load of corn, even 55gal drums full.

Joe A.

Uncle Ted is a human and prone to making mistakes, he was treated like any other Joe. He's not putting up any fuss and has paid for the infraction. Personally, I really like him and his show. He's about the only big name out there that get really excited about killing anything at all, from a doe to some scraggly looking cull buck.

quote:

Originally posted by dogcat:
Baiting deer SHOULD be illegal in all 50 states, not just California.

I'm glad you don't make the rules. In my opinion baiting should be legalized in all 50 states. At least then the hunter can make the judgment call as to whether or not to use it. But before anyone starts making accusations like "if your baiting you're not really hunting", just remember not everyone is as fortunate as you. Maybe they just don't have the ability to take off for days or weeks at a time or can afford to take the time off to go scouting out the best areas to increase their chances of shooting anything at all. Baiting does nothing other than increases the probability that the animals will frequent areas of your choosing on a regular basis.

I simply would rather let the individual make the choice rather than restrict the rights of everyone to satisfy a select few. Call me weird!

quote:

Kalifonia, has WAY too many rules

I was born and raised in Kalifornia and did my first deet hunt in Lake country. I was all of 11 years old. Even then, spikes and does have been sacred cows, never to be killed. We all know spike are cull deer at best and bever will grow decent antler but the damned Sierra Club abd other phucking ecoweenies have the political clout to keep them off the game lise. No wonder Kalifornia has such a messed up deer herd. About two years before I left kalifornia for good and forever, I shot a nice fat fored horn on Cow Mountain in Lake Country. Imagine my shock when that buck had a vagina. That damned doe had horns. I've heard from friends that still live there that it happens once in a while, probably more so now that the hed is more inbred that ever. It's too bad that California Game & Fish have to go begging for funds as all license money goes into the general fund and that the heads of game & Fish are p;olitical ecoweenie appointees. I'm surprise that state even has a der herd anymore.
The last time I pased through Northern california was when I went to see my daughter who then living in Oregon. it was late enough in the year that bucks should have had antler and as we passed along this highway, we counted over 50 dead deer on the side of the road, all does. Not a buck in the bunch. Twice several der ran out in front of us and I almost tagged a couple. No bucks there either.
Proper deer mamagement in California does not exist. It was that way when I left in 1970 and I's bet good money it hasn't changed a bit.
Paul B.

quote:

We all know spike are cull deer at best and bever will grow decent antler

Well, no, we don't all "know" that. A good friend of mine has 100 acres in northern Wisconsin. He has trail cameras all over the place. One spike buck, easily recognized by a white foot, turned out to be a 140 class buck a year later, and was shot at 153 the year after.

It was easily recognized by the white foot, and went from being a "cull deer", to a decent buck, to a great buck, all in two years.

Now, as to Ted? While I don't necessarily appreciate his over the top antics on his show, do appreciate the fact that he won't back down or apologize for being a hunter.

And yes, laws do vary GREATLY from state to state, and even times, within the same state! He did wrong, paid his fine and it's done.

End of story...

I'd like to comment on what Paul B has said in the above post about the Sierra Club having clout. We Have Clout but we just don't make as much noise as the folks in the Sierral Club. We think because we pay our license fees everybody knows how we stand. Not so. Speak up Make yourself heard. I am not a big fan of Uncle Ted either but at least we know how he feels about his rights and hunting privileges. DW

quote:

Originally posted by ddrhook:
ok now for some real news??? anyone have any reall news??

I thought the same thing.

There is nothing smaller, cuter, sweeter and more un huntable or un shootable than an El Dorado county spike buck.

Ted should have passed. Ok, great, he paid his fine and lived up to his responsibility but the truth is he got trigger happy on a slightly grown fawn.

I hope you got good ratings for the show Ted.

I don't think Ted possesses the ability to pass a shot on anything... He likes to whack 'em all !
... just my take on Ted.

quote:

Originally posted by Outdoor Writer:
Rock star Nugent fined for baiting deer on TV show ...August 13, 2010 11:19:00 PM
By Rob Young/Appeal-Democrat

It appears to me that this writing hack has mixed messages in this "democrat" report tale.

quote:

Nugent, who did not appear in court, also illegally shot an immature buck on the show but was not charged, according to Fish and Game.

Wonder why? Are they going to do their job or not?

quote:

Baiting deer is legal in some states but not in California, said department spokesman Patrick Foy. Baiting supplies are sold at some outdoor stores, he said.

The deer was killed in El Dorado County toward the end of deer hunting season last fall but brought to Yuba County. Two co-defendants, Mitchell Neil Moore and Ross Albert Patterson, live in Yuba County, said Vacek.

Moore was a photographer on the Outdoor Channel show. Patterson, who pleaded no contest to taking an animal with bait, actively spread bait called "C'mere Deer." His family owns the El Dorado County property where the hunt took place, said Foy.

So, Patterson actually spread the Bait. But, the Headline is such that it leads a person to believe Mr. Nugent Baited the Deer. Since Patterson's "family" owns the property, it sure looks like to me they should have known all about the Rules & Regs!

quote:

Patterson was fined $1,225.

This appears "at first" to be a bit out of balance on the scales of justice to me, since Mr. Nugent was fined $1,750.

quote:

{Mr.) Nugent was originally facing a charge of killing a "spike" — an immature buck — on the program, but the charge was dropped during negotiations between his attorney and the Yuba County District Attorney's Office, said Foy.

Ah-ha, Fine him for Hunting over Bait(not Baiting the area, which is different) and for Killing the Spike, but don't charge him with actualling Killing an illegal Deer(by their Laws).

quote:

A Fish and Game warden saw the show in March and "just about fell out of his chair" when he saw Nugent with the buck, according to Foy.

Pure sensationalism and adds nothing.

quote:

Nugent was "very cooperative" when contacted in March after the show aired, Foy said.

And since the fool writing this trashing of Mr. Nugent NEVER TALKED TO HIM, I'll guess Mr. Nugent was quite surprised that he had broken any Law.

quote:

A Nugent biography on the website activemusician.com calls him "an outspoken advocate of hunting and gun ownership rights and the owner of 350 guns himself."

Soooo????? Surely not tring to make Mr. Nugent out as a blood-thirsty KILLER!!!

quote:

Nugent has served on the National Rifle Association's board of directors since 1995 and has had a long adversarial relationship with the animal rights movement, according to the biography.

Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition!!!!
-----

Obviously Mr. Nugent should know the Rules & Regs anywhere he goes. Yet to me it appears Mr. Nugent was "Baited" into the Hunt by Mr. Patterson, who's family owns the property and absolutely should have known ALL THE RULES & REGS.

However, the intent of the alleged writer was to make Mr. Nugent look bad to the readers of that worthless "democrat" rag, and for those that don't know any better, he probably accomplished his mission. Pitiful and Pathetic from every angle regardless how it is shuffled.

Ted may have a few faults as we all do............but he is doing more so you can keep your guns and go hunting than anyone posting here...thats for damned sure. He sure as hell ain't doing it to get recognized....I think that part has already been accomplished. Lets all be glad he is a gun owner, loves hunting and puts that very passion on the table for everyone to see and kicks ass when he debates the antihunting groups. Yea, thats right....be glad he is not a force against us. He would be a formidable opponent if he was! I'm with Ted.

Ted is all about the backstraps, I think he far prefers to arrow the younger deer. I have no problem with it and am starting to feel the same way. C'mere deer is considered an illegal bait in California? Scrooum!

Come on guys, everybody loves it when a celebrity fucks up, especially the guys enforcing the rules. Guy screwed up, admitted it and paid the price. Not a Ted Nugent fan, but he handled it appropriately. Let's leave it at that. Let Him, who is without fault, hurl the first stone.

Grizz

quote:

"C'mere Deer."

Never hunted California. Some of the places I've hunted where the line was drawn on baiting, did not allow shooting game over some form of food pile that was artificially distributed, not being planted crops or a food plot. Never used it, but I didn't know something like "C'mere Deer" was considered a pile of food, I thought it was an attractant made from extracts. If California bans the use of extracts used as attractants, that's pretty darn extreme I think. I recon an aroma is now considered a food source. I better not be smoking vanilla scented tobacco or else I'd be arrested for baiting

Best

Maybe we should all look at this as a learnng experience and thus profit from it.

First of all it is our responsibility as hunters to know the rules and regulations of the state that we are hunting. You can't push that responsibility off to the guide or outfitter. If cited, you the person that committed the offense will face the local court, not your outfitter. Don't trust the word of anyone.

What you can do in your state may not be legal in another, in fact probably won't be legal.

If you do commit a violation, fess up and take your medicine. I applaud Nugent for the way he handled it. It also shows that in the vast majority of cases political or celebrity clout won't but you anything in Game violations. You can't say that about most others.

While I personally would never hunt over bait if it is legal in a state then I have no problems with someone else doing it.

465H&H

"§257.5. Prohibition Against Taking Resident Game Birds and Mammals by the Aid of Bait.

Except as otherwise provided in these regulations or in the Fish and Game Code, resident game birds and mammals may not be taken within 400 yards of any baited area.

(a) Definition of Baited Area. As used in this regulation, "baited area" shall mean any area where shelled, shucked or unshucked corn, wheat or other grains, salt, or other feed whatsoever capable of luring, attracting, or enticing such birds or mammals is directly or indirectly placed, exposed, deposited, distributed, or scattered, and such area shall remain a baited area for ten days following complete removal of all such corn, wheat or other grains, salt, or other feed."

I decided to search the California Fish and Game Commision "Mammal Hunting Regulations" to read the actual code section which I posted above. In addition, I checked the official classification for "C'mere Deer" to determine if it was indeed a feed or food. I see that C'mere Deer is neither feed nor food, but is an attractant made from extracts. Being that C'mere Deer is neither salt, feed, nor food... what does it matter if it is an attractant capable of luring game. A grunt is also an attractant capable of luring game as is extracts of glands, but they are neither feed nor food and are legal. How does an extract such as C'mere Deer become illegal as applied to this code??

I can see how one would need to retain a lawyer to advise on the differing regs and interpretations prior to going afield. Reading the public record, I'm thinking that the baiting charge would not have held water in court and that had it not been for the immature buck, Ted could have fought and won at trial. But being there was an immature buck involved, pleading guilty to the baiting charge and paying fines while having an agreement to forgo charges and trial on the immature buck was probably the path of least resistance.

As I said before, I've never used the stuff, but I think it would need to be classified as either salt, feed, or food to apply as the law is written.

Best

quote:

Originally posted by Geedubya:
I'm not a huge "Nuge" fan. Being a somewhat bland and laid back individual, Ted is somewhat "over the top" for my tastes. In the last year I have turned off the hunting channels. Too many commercials and too much emphasis on trophy taking, and too much celebratory nonsense after the kill for this ol' fart.
However, having said that, It seems to me that some folks sure have it in for ol' Ted. Guess when you are at the top, folks want to bring you down.
Maybe if he was a sodomite or a serial rapist or ran an abortion mill,he would fare better in the eye of the public. Somehow, I don't think labeling the guy as a "poacher" for this incident is correct. But he sure has given himself a black eye.
Best
GWB

+1.

quote:

Originally posted by GaryVA:
"§257.5. Prohibition Against Taking Resident Game Birds and Mammals by the Aid of Bait.

Except as otherwise provided in these regulations or in the Fish and Game Code, resident game birds and mammals may not be taken within 400 yards of any baited area.

(a) Definition of Baited Area. As used in this regulation, "baited area" shall mean any area where shelled, shucked or unshucked corn, wheat or other grains, salt, or other feed whatsoever capable of luring, attracting, or enticing such birds or mammals is directly or indirectly placed, exposed, deposited, distributed, or scattered, and such area shall remain a baited area for ten days following complete removal of all such corn, wheat or other grains, salt, or other feed."

I decided to search the California Fish and Game Commision "Mammal Hunting Regulations" to read the actual code section which I posted above. In addition, I checked the official classification for "C'mere Deer" to determine if it was indeed a feed or food. I see that C'mere Deer is neither feed nor food, but is an attractant made from extracts. Being that C'mere Deer is neither salt, feed, nor food... what does it matter if it is an attractant capable of luring game. A grunt is also an attractant capable of luring game as is extracts of glands, but they are neither feed nor food and are legal. How does an extract such as C'mere Deer become illegal as applied to this code??

I can see how one would need to retain a lawyer to advise on the differing regs and interpretations prior to going afield. Reading the public record, I'm thinking that the baiting charge would not have held water in court and that had it not been for the immature buck, Ted could have fought and won at trial. But being there was an immature buck involved, pleading guilty to the baiting charge and paying fines while having an agreement to forgo charges and trial on the immature buck was probably the path of least resistance.

As I said before, I've never used the stuff, but I think it would need to be classified as either salt, feed, or food to apply as the law is written.

Best

Good question so I went to their website; "C'mere Deer" apparently comes in three forms:
1) liquid spray: that one can't be food as it does nothing but smell.
2) powder: perhaps.
3) pelletized: definately is food product.

I found this from their "Frequently Asked Questions" page as most telling:

quote:

Some states allow the use of C'Mere Deer liquid where baiting is not allowed since the liquid is not considered a food source. If in doubt, we advise you to contact your state and/or local Wildlife or Conservation Department for legal advice.

I go along with most of what Geedubya stated, but more with what Grizz said.

Any of us that hunt out of state or out of the country for that matter, have a responsibilty, whether it is a D-I-Y hunt or with a guide/outfitter/PH, to become as well aquainted with the laws of the local we are going to hunt in, no matter how many hunts we make.

Nugent messed up this time, but from some of what has been stated, he was not alone in this incident.

I really doubt that there are any of us on here that are 100% pure and have never stepped over the edge in regards to game laws.

He's a bit over-the-top for me too, but he's more articulate than most of the other show hosts put together and I respect that. For the most part he's a good spokes person for hunting and gun rights. More importantly I think he appeals to an additional segment of voters that probably aren't influenced by other writers and TV hosts.

But I didn't notice anyone commenting on the fine amount. $1,750 seems like pretty low production costs to get game good and close for a TV show. At those prices if baiting fits into the hosts paradigm of "hunting" why would any TV producer ever blink an eye at that additional cost? That's not much more money than a license and tag in some states. Possibly cheaper than the travel and lodging and definitely cheaper than a second camera man. Seems hardly a stiff penalty given the situation.