Man loses hunting license for abandoning bighorn sheep's remains
by Megan Crepeau, The Oregonian
Wednesday February 18, 2009

A Gresham-area man has had his hunting license suspended after he killed a bighorn sheep, severed its head and horns, and abandoned its carcass.

Ronald Edward Cecil, 49, pleaded guilty Feb. 12 to waste of wildlife, a misdemeanor.

"When you shoot the animals, you're required to take the meat (so) it doesn't waste the game animals," said Oregon State Police Lt. Patrick Ashmore. "It's a waste of life, whether you're an animal activist or not."

A trooper with the Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife first spotted Cecil hiking from the John Day River area carrying the head and horns of a bighorn sheep. Suspicious that Cecil had not taken the meat from the carcass, which is required by law, troopers searched the area and found the partially scavenged body several days later.

An investigation revealed that Cecil had killed the sheep lawfully. He possessed a bighorn sheep tag, which hunters can only apply for once. Oregon's fish and wildlife agency issued fewer than 100 bighorn sheep tags in Oregon.

"It's a very big deal," said Michelle Dennehy, an agency spokeswoman. "People wait a lifetime to get this tag."

Cecil was sentenced to a $1,500 fine and 12 months' probation. His hunting privileges will be suspended for two years. The court also ordered Cecil to turn over the sheep's head and horns.

"These bighorn trophies are really valuable to hunters," Ashmore said. "It's a real prestigious trophy."

What a fool. Get a once in a lifetime tag and sacrifice not only your right to future tags, but also the trophy from that hunt. He could have boned out the ram and brought it out in 1 or 2 trips. And, all the bighorn meat I've ever tried was outstanding. It's worth any amount of effort to use every scrap.

I don't know about Oregon, but in my native Colorado, you have to get all sheep and goats inspected by the Division of Wildlife. And when we have taken one in for inspection, they demand to see the meat as well.

Worst of all, think of the ammo this gives to the antis.

Once in a lifetime trophy and this upstanding citizen pulls that kind of stunt, then he should lose his hunting priveledges for the rest of his life, and if oregon is one of the Wildlife Violators Compact states or whatever the proper name is of the group, then he would lose his hunting priveldges for life in 20 or 30 states.

This is the type of person and attitude that should never be alloweed to hunt again, and probably never be allowed to own a firearm again.

I wonder if he realized he threw away some good eating. Probably didn't care!

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:
Once in a lifetime trophy and this upstanding citizen pulls that kind of stunt, then he should lose his hunting priveledges for the rest of his life, and if oregon is one of the Wildlife Violators Compact states or whatever the proper name is of the group, then he would lose his hunting priveldges for life in 20 or 30 states.

This is the type of person and attitude that should never be alloweed to hunt again, and probably never be allowed to own a firearm again.

Some people never cease to amaze me with their total stupidity & disregard for natures bounty, PLUS ONE ON THE LIFE BAN!

Let's look at what he really did. He shoots the sheep, he takes the head and horns, leaves the carcass. I would certainly argue that it wasn't a "waste" except that the law defines it so, for many critters probably put the meat to better use than he would have. Heck, this carcass may have actually saved other sheep because the predators had one less kill to make. The real violation is that he set a bad example by leaving the carcass in the woods, not that he wasted it. With a little more work he could have legally "wasted" it by taking the carcass home and dumping it in the garbage - no violation, no lost license.

Yup, he makes hunters looks like slobs and he was responsible to know the laws. He broke the law and will pay the punishment for his crime, but is this really to the level of lifetime hunting bans or lifetime firearms bans, even after LEGALLY TAKING the ram? I'm not defending the guy, and I know things like this can stir emotions, but it sounds to me like the punishment fit the crime.

The only meat I wont pack out unless someone else wants it is a fall bear. Not required to but am required to do so in the spring and rightly so. Fall meat can be really skanked depending on what they are feeding on. This guy should have known the law and obeyed it. Even if he didnt want the meat it is required to pack it out. Give it to a food bank if nothing else.

stupid bastard - sheep meat is #1 eating

erict wrote:

quote:

Let's look at what he really did. He shoots the sheep, he takes the head and horns, leaves the carcass. I would certainly argue that it wasn't a "waste" except that the law defines it so, for many critters probably put the meat to better use than he would have. Heck, this carcass may have actually saved other sheep because the predators had one less kill to make. The real violation is that he set a bad example by leaving the carcass in the woods, not that he wasted it. With a little more work he could have legally "wasted" it by taking the carcass home and dumping it in the garbage - no violation, no lost license.

This has got to one of the stupidest friggin post I've ever read!!!!!!!!! Leave it a yankee in NY to try to rationalize the deliberate and intentional waste of game meat!!!!!!

Sheep meat is the best eating of all wild game in North America!!!!!!!! And the law of every state they live in requires the meat be utilized!!!!!!!!! It is not only against the law, but also morally wrong to shoot an bighorn sheep stictly for the head and horns!!!!!!!! To try to put this in any category other than OUTRAGE is friggin stupid!!!!!!!!

quote:

He broke the law and will pay the punishment for his crime, but is this really to the level of lifetime hunting bans or lifetime firearms bans, even after LEGALLY TAKING the ram?

Hell yeah it is to that level. Many people wait a lifetime for a tag like this and never draw. If he isn't able to obey the laws on a tag like that, what makes you think he will obey any of the wildlife laws? Bottom line, we don't need idiots like that afield and we sure don't need idiots like you trying to defend him!!!!!!

Stay in NY, yankee boy, you don't quite have the right attitude for anyplace else!

We haven't heard the guys side of the story. Even though the law may require the meat be brought out first, it is the head or antlers most hunters on non-subsistance hunts are most concerned with, and for which they have saved their dollars. I have obeyed the law in Alaska, packing out a load of caribou meat first, only to return the next day to find the rest of the meat buried, and the head carried off to Lord knows where. I have also packed out too heavy a load in wet conditions and had feet too blistered to use the next few days. If a sow grizzly and cubs have taken over the carcass, its also best to let them have it This guy did the right thing in getting the head out first--it was the most important thing. Did he have a good reason for failing to return for the meat? We just don't know. The punishment was too extreme IMO.

This guy is an idiot. It's mandatory that he check in his ram with ODFW within 72 hours after completing his hunt. Certainly he would have been busted by just having the head and no meat.

To put it into perspective of what this once in a lifetime draw amounts to, the auction tag for an Oregon Bighorn sells for over $100k every year. That is not just to shoot a ram, but to take a ram in the state of Oregon while obeying the laws in Oregon.

I have a good friend who works fish and game for Oregon State Police. Game cases are difficult to get a conviction most of the time. He agrees with me that any game violation should be considered a crime committed while using a firearm, even if it is with a bow or muzzleloader, thus making it felony and making that person a felon.

Oregon is a participating state in the Wildlife Violators Compact that would prevent this person from buying a license and tags in other states that are participants as well.

The states that are not part of this are:

Texas, Oklahoma, Mississippi, South Carolina, Virginia, West Virginia, Deleware, New Jersey, Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Vermont, Maine and Hawaii.

We now know where to export our game violators!

SGRAVES 155 writes

quote:

We haven't heard the guys side of the story.

Sorry, but I beg to differ. I guess you didn't read the story. I offer the following"

quote:

Ronald Edward Cecil, 49, pleaded guilty Feb. 12 to waste of wildlife, a misdemeanor.
"When you shoot the animals, you're required to take the meat (so) it doesn't waste the game animals," said Oregon State Police Lt. Patrick Ashmore.

A trooper with the Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife first spotted Cecil hiking from the John Day River area carrying the head and horns of a bighorn sheep. Suspicious that Cecil had not taken the meat from the carcass, which is required by law, troopers searched the area and found the partially scavenged body several days later.

He made absolutely no attempt to bring out the meat. It was found scavenged. All he cared about was the trophy. Nothing except laziness prevented him from bringing it out after the trophy was in camp. I once packed out a complete, boned out Mtn Goat including the cape, off a 14,000 ft mountain in Colorado. It wasn't easy, but every edible scrap of that goat was used.

Why do you people keep trying to make excuses for this admitted criminal?

quote:

He made absolutely no attempt to bring out the meat. It was found scavenged. All he cared about was the trophy. Nothing except laziness prevented him from bringing it out after the trophy was in camp.

You seem to be able to determine motives and situations with zero info regarding same. Your open-mindedness regarding the opinions of others appears also to be zero.

SGraves 155,


Are you really that brain dead? Read the link.

The law officers saw him with only the head and became suspicious. It seems as though they gave him a couple days to recover the meat. This gave him the benefit of the doubt as to his intentions. When they went and investigated, they found the meat unrecoverd and scavenged, which was clearly a violation of the law.

I don't have to try to "be able to determine motives and situations with zero info regarding same". I just read what happened.

I hunt the rockies every year. I have hunted and taken both sheep and goat. If this guy cared about the meat, he would have taken the steps to bone it out and be ready to pack it out. You can bone a sheep in less than an hour and a half. And you can stash the meat in places that would prevent it being scavenged. It could have been hung in a tree or covered with rocks etc... I do this with deer and elk every season, and have never had a single piece of meat scavenged if the proper pre-cautions are taken. Remember, this was Oregon, not Alaska, no grizzlies and very few wolves. All he had to do was avoid the black bears and coyotes for a day or two. Not overly difficult.

Bottom line, it would take at the most, 2 trips to bring it down. He could have returned the next day with a buddy and had it all off the mountain. Even if they had returned and found it already scavenged, he could have contacted the law and been absolved by at least trying to recover the animal.

What part of pleading guilty ie... admitting to the charge, don't you understand?

The other factor not considered here is was this hunter alone? I grew up with the always hunt with a buddy system. Someone else to help you glass for your quarry. Someone to help you pack out meat in as few trips as possible. Someone to high-five when you get your trophy or meat for the season. Someone to get help if you become incapacitated. Unless the law specifies that only the hunter may pursue his sheep. I am unfamiliar with the laws.

Yes, I believe this was a gross injustice. I have only eaten bighorn once. It was fantastic!!

Andy B

MAC,
Here are a few things that we don't know from the story that you are assuming you do know:

1) taking the head out first is the reasonable thing to do. Did he intend to return for the meat?? No where does he say that he only intended to get the head. Are you absolutely sure that was his intent?
2) What was the situation when he got to base camp with the head? Had he suffered any injuries or illness or had any messages that required him to leave? We don't know because we haven't heard his side of the story.
3) He plead guilty to a misdemeanor, was he offered a deal that would save him lawyer fees if he plead, even if he had a good reason for his action? Even innocent people will plead guilty to minor charges in order to avoid legal fees that will break them financially.

Once again, the answer to all three questions is:
We can't know because we haven't heard his side of the story.

So you are the one who is casting dispersions not only on him, but on me. You are making up your own ideas of what his situation was in regard to my questions, then trying to insult me with your childish reasoning when I point that out to you. Take a look at yourself.

+1.

The man's guilty plea in this case means nothing without the rest of the story.

Prosecution in cases like this one is often strict, to the letter of the law, notwithstanding extenuating circumstances.

Extenuation may only come into play during sentencing.

I wouldn't be so fast to jump on "erict." Anyone who knows me knows I take all the meat and I use it all, it doesn't get fed to the dog after a year in the freezer etc.

However...leaving the carcass leaves it for the animals that would have naturally eaten it anyway, all he's taken from the ecosystem is the trophy. I could also argue that the bones make mighty tasty soup and we don't take them. What about leaving the liver, heart, kidneys-hell the Inuit love the eyeballs and we "waste" those.

the chef

When I lived in Alaska because of the "Native" issue there was very strict enforcement of the wanton waste laws. In fact enforcement to the point of being ridiculous. Personally I think if you kill it you should retrieve the meat. There is a BUT here though. If a person from the Lower 48 or a foriegn country comes to Alaska, buys a tag for $500 or whatever the tag cost and kills a moose. Does he own that moose? If he owns that moose should he be able to do with it as he wishes? If he leaves the meat in the field or just part of it in the field what is the harm? The law says he can pack the meat out and then take it directly to the dump. Is that right?

I personally can't imagine drawing a once in a lifetime tag and not retrieving every scrap from that ram. If we agree though that by drawing and paying for the tag I own the ram I shoot then I should be able to do with it as I see fit. If not retrieving all the meat attacks someone's sensibilities well.....

I guess the question is did the above mentioned hunter own the sheep? He was dumb to not make a effort to retrieve the meat but is the law he broke a good one? I don't know!

Mark

MAC,

It's a shame you have to make this personal instead of arguing the topic of the post. Not sure what being a "yankee" has to do with anything, I don't appreciate being called an "idiot" by someone that never met me and I most certainly wasn't defending the man. PM me if you have a personal problem with me and we can discuss in private.

I did find a picture of the carcass from Oregon State Police News Releases- we will likely not ever hear the full story, and again I AM NOT DEFENDING THE MAN, but wouldn't a man with serious criminal intent bury the carcass or at least stash it under piles of stones, branches, etc?



This topic is obviously "near and dear" to you because it paints a poor picture of sheep hunters. I'm sorry that the press only prints these and not the many good stories like you may have. Good luck this upcoming season. - Eric (Yankee by birth, USAF by choice for 23 years and counting)

quote:

Originally posted by erict:
MAC,

It's a shame you have to make this personal instead of arguing the topic of the post. Not sure what being a "yankee" has to do with anything, I don't appreciate being called an "idiot" by someone that never met me and I most certainly wasn't defending the man. PM me if you have a personal problem with me and we can discuss in private.

I did find a picture of the carcass from Oregon State Police News Releases- we will likely not ever hear the full story, and again I AM NOT DEFENDING THE MAN, but wouldn't a man with serious criminal intent bury the carcass or at least stash it under piles of stones, branches, etc?



This topic is obviously "near and dear" to you because it paints a poor picture of sheep hunters. I'm sorry that the press only prints these and not the many good stories like you may have. Good luck this upcoming season. - Eric (Yankee by birth, USAF by choice for 23 years and counting)

I also find it a poor argument to differentiate between creed or race, the animal whatever species should be treated with some respect, over here we even have to dispose of our fox carcasses, we can be prosecuted for leaving stuff lying about

I don't think 'ownership' means do what you will. I own my car but that doesn't mean I can leave the used oil by the curb.
What doesn't make sense here is this couldn't be a novice hunter who did this. Who has shot a sheep as one of their first 5 animals? Most are deer or rabbits or coyotes. Plus, in most cases, you need better gear to get to the sheep ie boots/scope/packs. It's not like you're deer hunting.
I have to assume this isn't this guy's first hunt. So he should have some rudimentary understanding of game laws. My bet is he was just lazy. He got off that mountain and didn't want to make that climb again. But here is a possible explanation for his actions - he had to shoot it multiple times. And in doing so he shot it thru the shoulders and rump rendering the meat relatively useless. Just playing Devil's advocate...
But whatever the case is, the law says you have to bring it down. Period.

One question though: If you have to make multiple trips to retreive your game, do you have to take the meat before the head?

One tip - Cover any meat you have to leave with your shirt (the one closest to your body). The scent will keep away a lot of predators.

SGraves 155 and erict

Both of you appear to be going out on a limb trying to find a way to condone what this guy did. I'm not sure how you come to any conclusion that this is in any way reasonable.

SGraves155;

From your signature line, I see that you are from Arkansas. So I looked to see what Arkansas has to say about the waste of game meat.

quote:

http://www.agfc.com/hunting/genregs.aspx

It is not legal to:
•waste the edible portions of game, fish or waste marketable fur.
•fail to comply with the terms of a Commission-issued permit.

So, this guys actions would also be illegal in your home state. Do you condone wasting deer meat in Arkansas?

erict;

From your signature line I see you are from New York. I looked to see what New York has to say about waste of game meat. While I didn't find any particular quote, I did find the tagging instructions which imply the carcass must be utilized.

quote:

http://www.dec.ny.gov/docs/wildlife_pdf/08guidebiggm.pdf

Tagging
Here’s what you must do immediately upon killing a deer or bear:

1. Fill in all information on the carcass tag and report tag with ink that won’t erase.
2. Detach the carcass tag from the report tag. Once filled in, the tag may not be altered.
3. Keep the report tag, you will need it when you report your deer or bear.
4. The month and date must also be cut or marked in ink on the margin of the carcass tag.
5. You do not need to attach the tag to the carcass while it is being dragged or physically
carried from the place of kill to a camp or point where transportation is available.
6. Once you get to the camp or vehicle, attach the tag to the carcass immediately.
7. Keep the tag attached to the carcass until it is cut up and prepared for consumption.
After you have used your last deer tag, you may help others hunt deer. You may not carry
a firearm or bow, and you must have your hunting license.

Would you condone the waste of a deer or bear carcass in New York?

I also looked up the regulations for Oregon, which just happen to cover this particular incident. Since these are laws of that state for which the license was issued, the individual in question should have been familiar with them.

quote:

http://www.dfw.state.or.us/res...09biggameregsweb.pdf

It is Illegal to:

Waste any game mammals or parts thereof, except that meat of cougar need not be salvaged.


Hunters: Be aware that under the Interstate Wildlife Violators Compact (Compact),
you can have your Oregon hunting licenses and tags revoked or suspended
if you violate the wildlife laws of other states. This means if your license or tag
privileges which come under the scope of the Compact are suspended or revoked
in one member state, they are subject to suspension or revocation in all member
states. Please visit our Web site at: www.dfw.state.or.us/resources/...violator_compact.asp.

erict, in regards to your photo, all you have done is make my point. If that is indeed the carcass, why wasn't it taken care of? There is a tree directly behind it. That meat should have been boned and hung in a game bag from the tree. Nobody that is concerned with the meat would leave it laying on the ground in that condition.

quote:

SGraves155 wrote

MAC,
Here are a few things that we don't know from the story that you are assuming you do know:

1) taking the head out first is the reasonable thing to do. Did he intend to return for the meat?? No where does he say that he only intended to get the head. Are you absolutely sure that was his intent?
2) What was the situation when he got to base camp with the head? Had he suffered any injuries or illness or had any messages that required him to leave? We don't know because we haven't heard his side of the story.
3) He plead guilty to a misdemeanor, was he offered a deal that would save him lawyer fees if he plead, even if he had a good reason for his action? Even innocent people will plead guilty to minor charges in order to avoid legal fees that will break them financially.

I'll adress these in order.

1) Nobody is saying that taking the head out first is unreasonable, but anyone that has done any hunting in the rockies will know that the carcass in the photo was not properly taken care of. Meat care begins as soon as the animal is taken. Based on the phote erict provided, would you say that the carcass looks as though the guy intended to salvage it?

2)If this guy was unable to recover the meat, due to injury etc... he should have contacted the game warden as soon as he was back in town. I'd bet $100 that they would have sent someone in to get it if the man was injured. Failure to make any attempt to recover it is exactly where this guy screwed up.

3) What proof do you have that he was offered a deal? Neither of us knows that, but it isn't relevant anyways. If you look at the links for the State of Oregon I posted, he would be fully aware of the implications as to his hunting rights not only in Oregon, but also nation-wide by pleading guilty. Bottom line, I don't need to hear this guy's side. He was charged, had his day in court, and he entered a guilty plea. Case closed. What I can not fathom is why anyone that enjoys hunting will try to rationalize this guy's actions.

Here's a newsflash folks, the antis also read forums like this one. If hunters and sportsmen do not openly and publicly condemn actions like the ones this guy did, then the antis will use your own words against you. When it comes to game violations, we either band together and condemn them or we stand apart and let the antis take or hunting privliges away. Which side of the fence do you stand on?

In Alaska, you have to pack out all the meat before the horns/antlers. They can bust you for bringing out the horns/antlers before the meat.

Also, edible meat is defined as meat of the ribs and neck. It is quite explicit. I've read thru other states regs and they don't get this specific. I've even asked for a clarification on both issues.

MAC,
1)the picture is impossible to interpret, at least on my screen.
2)You are still willing to determine that this guy is either incredibly evil, or incredibly stupid, without hearing his side of the story. No matter what you wish to interpret from the news article, nowhere in the article is his own story of events given.. I don't judge people's intent or intelligence without hearing their side of an argument; making guesses is just that. You are obviously unable to realize that major fact.
One of the definitions of premature judgment is to make a judgment before all sides or facts of a story or argument are heard. No matter what evil intents you assign to this guy, you haven't heard his side of the story. Your arguments to the contrary and your insults to erict and me tell us more about you than they do anybody else. Good Day.

I don't see how a single hunter could pack it all out in one trip. Who knows what would be left of the carcass after a night in the woods. Coyotes eat a deer down to the bones in minutes.

SGraves155 writes

quote:

One of the definitions of premature judgment is to make a judgment before all sides or facts of a story or argument are heard. No matter what evil intents you assign to this guy, you haven't heard his side of the story.

What side could he possibly have if he entered a guilty plea? By pleading guilty, he admitted the basic documented facts were correct. He wasn't convicted by a jury, but rather by his own admission. This seems really simple, even to a country boy like myself.

The documented and relevant facts are:

1) He drew a very limited sheep tag.
2) He killed the sheep he was legally licensed to shoot.
3) He was seen taking out the trophy, but failed to take out the meat. This is a direct violation of the laws of the State of Oregon, which issued the tag in the first place.
4) He was charged with and arrested for waste of meat.
5) He entered a guilty plea.
6) He was awarded a monetary fine, was placed on probation and had his hunting privileges suspended.
7) Case closed. There is no other side to the situation that could be even slightly relevant.

You still didn't answer my earlier question:

So, this guys actions would also be illegal in your home state. Do you condone wasting deer meat in Arkansas?

Either you condemn game viloations or you condone them. It's impossible to have it both ways. I for one will always condemn them. By your own posts on this topic, it appears as though you do not. And that could very well be the biggest difference between us.

And with that, I leave this topic for good.

Mac
You have a very limited understanding of how our legal system works.

quote:

Originally posted by erict:
Let's look at what he really did. He shoots the sheep, he takes the head and horns, leaves the carcass. I would certainly argue that it wasn't a "waste" except that the law defines it so, for many critters probably put the meat to better use than he would have. Heck, this carcass may have actually saved other sheep because the predators had one less kill to make. The real violation is that he set a bad example by leaving the carcass in the woods, not that he wasted it. With a little more work he could have legally "wasted" it by taking the carcass home and dumping it in the garbage - no violation, no lost license.

Yup, he makes hunters looks like slobs and he was responsible to know the laws. He broke the law and will pay the punishment for his crime, but is this really to the level of lifetime hunting bans or lifetime firearms bans, even after LEGALLY TAKING the ram? I'm not defending the guy, and I know things like this can stir emotions, but it sounds to me like the punishment fit the crime.

Are you shitting me? What a stupid post. Don't ever come to Alaska, shoot a moose in a slough then leave it. You'd be castrated by any Alaskan that found you doing something like that. Better yet, stay home & waste your own deer. You make me ashamed to admit that I'm originally from your "neck of the woods".
Hey guys, not all of us from the east coast have that attitude.
Bear in Fairbanks ( A displaced New Yorker for 40+ years by choice.)

Oh boy, here we go again! What is starting to get on my nerves is not the personal attacks, but the lack of reading comprehension being exhibited by some members.

I stand corrected because I believed that Oregon had a "wanton waste" law (meaning failure to retrieve the carcass from the field), but, in fact, Oregon law simply states that it is illegal to waste the meat of game animals. This means that it would still be illegal to throw it in the garbage once he got home, but the chances of getting caught and the outrage would be significantly less had he done that instead of what happened.

He did waste meat, pled guilt and will pay his fine/suspensions, etc.. Do you support the loss of his hunting privileges and even his right to bear arms for LIFE for what he did? That is my whole point - is it really reasonable that he lose everything for life (as some suggested) given his violation? My opinion, which last I knew I was entitled to, is "No".

Just in case no one got it the first time - I do not condone this man's actions, nor do I condone wasting meat. I respect that everyone is entitled to their opinion, even when it is wrong .

Hope that clears things up.

I dont know the Oregon law as to its wording. However if it is like Alaska the meat must be packed out first before the cape and head is allowed to be recovered.

quote:

Originally posted by SGraves155:
We haven't heard the guys side of the story. Even though the law may require the meat be brought out first, it is the head or antlers most hunters on non-subsistance hunts are most concerned with, and for which they have saved their dollars. I have obeyed the law in Alaska, packing out a load of caribou meat first, only to return the next day to find the rest of the meat buried, and the head carried off to Lord knows where. I have also packed out too heavy a load in wet conditions and had feet too blistered to use the next few days. If a sow grizzly and cubs have taken over the carcass, its also best to let them have it This guy did the right thing in getting the head out first--it was the most important thing. Did he have a good reason for failing to return for the meat? We just don't know. The punishment was too extreme IMO.

WAH!

You knew what the rules were going in. As an intelligent human being, if your highest priority was the horns you should have been smart enough to have a plan to protect them.

quote:

Originally posted by erict:
Let's look at what he really did. He shoots the sheep, he takes the head and horns, leaves the carcass. I would certainly argue that it wasn't a "waste" except that the law defines it so, for many critters probably put the meat to better use than he would have. Heck, this carcass may have actually saved other sheep because the predators had one less kill to make. The real violation is that he set a bad example by leaving the carcass in the woods, not that he wasted it. With a little more work he could have legally "wasted" it by taking the carcass home and dumping it in the garbage - no violation, no lost license.

If you can't do the time don't do the crime.

i been ducking and dodging the flying quotes,
slinging of mud,name calling...
i swear most of us are here for the bar fight
and the passion i read in most of the posts indicate we all feel pretty much the same way.
guy was a dipshit and a liability to all
ethical hunters.
and he certainly ended up not deserving a bighorn sheep.
and if you read carefully the court made him give up the head and cape.
short of confiscating his pictures and erasing his mental memory,the dipshit got what he deserved!sick,blind,cripple or crazy i don't care.
no excuses,no explainations needed

quote:

Originally posted by erict:

He did waste meat, pled guilt and will pay his fine/suspensions, etc.. Do you support the loss of his hunting privileges and even his right to bear arms for LIFE for what he did? That is my whole point - is it really reasonable that he lose everything for life (as some suggested) given his violation? My opinion, which last I knew I was entitled to, is "No".

Hope that clears things up.

I swore I would stay out of this thread, but...

He lost NOTHING for life. Regardless of what has been "suggested," it is irrelvant. In fact, I'll highlight the pertinent parts. Especially pay attention to the bolded text.

>>Ronald Edward Cecil, 49, pleaded guilty Feb. 12 to waste of wildlife, a misdemeanor.<<

He was not convicted of a felony, which is the factor preventing him from owning firearms.

>>Cecil was sentenced to a $1,500 fine and 12 months' probation. His hunting privileges will be suspended for two years.<<

Self-explanatory; two years is a bit short of a lifetime.

In short, he deserved what he got.

Bear is right about Alaska. I have hunted with a buddy who lives there, he was so paranoid about getting accused of wanton waste that we took pictures of the remains of every animal killed for proof. My understanding is that it is a big fine.

quote:

Originally posted by Ratltrap:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by SGraves155:
We haven't heard the guys side of the story. Even though the law may require the meat be brought out first, it is the head or antlers most hunters on non-subsistance hunts are most concerned with, and for which they have saved their dollars. I have obeyed the law in Alaska, packing out a load of caribou meat first, only to return the next day to find the rest of the meat buried, and the head carried off to Lord knows where. I have also packed out too heavy a load in wet conditions and had feet too blistered to use the next few days. If a sow grizzly and cubs have taken over the carcass, its also best to let them have it This guy did the right thing in getting the head out first--it was the most important thing. Did he have a good reason for failing to return for the meat? We just don't know. The punishment was too extreme IMO.

WAH!

You knew what the rules were going in. As an intelligent human being, if your highest priority was the horns you should have been smart enough to have a plan to protect them.

______________

Perhaps you can tell me, Oh Wise One, how do you store a fresh caribou head to keep a Grizzly family from carrying it away on the treeless rolling tundra, whilst one is packing out some of the meat first, as required by law?
Perhaps you should have a plan or an answer before issuing insults?

The part of this thread that I find disturbing is how little room some of the posters have for a differing point of view.

Some have an attitude of you either agree with me 100% or you're the enemy and I will attack you.

I appreciate dissenting opinions - it is how I learn. And if I disagree, I can do it without anger or personal attacks - but apparently some feel the need to hurl bombs.

These people need to ask themselves why? Why alienate fellow hunters?

While I have no dog in this fight at all, I have to say that there are alot of you that need to take a class in US Legal 101..

Why is AK being used in the thread over and over again?? It has nothing to do with this case at all.. We ALL know that AK has the most strict guidelines of all the states, but where does that fit into this thread?? This thread has to do with OR and no where else.