Monday, May 30, 2005 · Last updated 6:01 p.m. PT

Four big game hunters accused of wildlife violations

By RACHEL D'ORO
ASSOCIATED PRESS WRITER

ANCHORAGE, Alaska -- Four men have been charged in an illegal black bear hunt on Prince of Wales Island after an undercover investigation by Alaska and Idaho authorities posing as hunters, Alaska State Troopers said Monday.

The men were arrested in the southeast Alaska town of Ketchikan as they got off a commuter ferry bringing them back from the seven-day hunt.

"I think they were pretty surprised," said Sgt. Burke Waldron in the troopers' wildlife investigations unit.

The men face numerous misdemeanor criminal charges, including operating without a state guiding license, leaving carcasses to rot and taking more than the legal limit. More charges are expected to be filed, troopers said.

Authorities were tipped to the case in an e-mail that Gary Sanders of Goodyear, Ariz., was advertising his guiding services on the Internet, offering hunts for black bear in Alaska and deer in Idaho even though he's not licensed to do so in either state, Waldron said. Sanders, 40, was convicted last year for unlicensed guiding in Idaho, Alaska authorities said.



"It looks like he's been doing this at least three years," Waldron said. "We're aware of at least nine clients in Alaska this year."

Alaska and Idaho wildlife authorities worked together on the current case. An undercover officer from each state posed as a hunter and made online arrangements to join the excursion on the island about 140 miles south of Juneau.

Each officer paid $1,950 apiece for the guiding service, lodging and food. That's about half what a legitimate operation would cost, Waldron said.

Also along for the trip were Robert Novak, 40, of Auburn, Wash., accused of working as Sanders' assistant, and two hunters, Robert Disidori, 31, a repeat client from Mickleton, N.J., and his friend, John Shields, 31, of Rising Sun, Md.

Sanders apparently didn't shoot any of the four bears killed or a fifth bear that was wounded but fled, Waldron said. One of the bears was killed by the officers, but the others were shot by other members of the party. That exceeded the annual limit for the area of one bear per hunter.

The men discarded the meat of two of the dead bears, leaving one of the animals with the hide intact, Waldron said. The rest of the meat was legally given away to residents of the island town of Craig.

"One of the hunters seemed to have blood lust," Waldron said. "He just likes to kill."

Sanders and Novak are charged with multiple counts of guiding without a license and other violations including wanton waste. Novak also is charged with exceeding the legal limit of black bear. Disidori and Shields are charged with wildlife violations including wanton waste and exceeding the legal limit.

Charges were filed in District Court in Ketchikan but will likely be transferred to Craig, Waldron said.

All four pleaded innocent at their arraignment Sunday on the misdemeanor charges.

A preliminary trial date is set for June 24.

Glad they got busted! That's a small town, an operation like that couldn't last long. Some folks just ain't too smart.

Brian: I read this article in the ADN this morning..I am always amazed at the audacity and stupidity of some people. Shooting bears and leaving them, hide and all...what the hell is that? I hope they get smacked.

I had a client once (I was a licensed outfitter at the time) who showed up late, having been sent as a bonus from the company he worked for, claiming he had just moved to Colorado, and had purchased resident tags. His story, address and limited knowledge of the state all seemed to fit, so I took him to camp with the rest of the party. To make it short, it turned out his brother lived here, but he didn't. The guy lied to save a few hundred bucks in license fees. He got one of the best bulls, and one of the best bucks of the year, then ended up prosecuted under the Lacy Act. It took about a year to catch up with the guy, but one afternoon I got an unexpected phone call from someone in his office which I immediately relayed to the DOW officer handling the case. They had an NFWS officer over there within hours. It amazes me what some folks will do to kill animals. These certainly are not hunters in my book, they are common criminals.

"One of the bears was killed by the officers." I wonder if the "officer" was charged?
Didn't the "officer" violate the law? If he shot the bear, he violated the law. I don't care if he is the President, he violated the law and should be charged.

TJ: I was looking at that as well to see who was doing what...by my arithemtic (using the newspaper [which could be a major mistake on my part]):

First, there were 4 people charged with braking several different laws (1) the guide who did not have a licence to guide, (2) the guide's assitance, who also shot a bear (we do not know which bear he shot or if he shot one, but the math makes since), (3) the meat of two bears from different shooters was not harvested when it should have been, (4) one bear was shot and left as it was (hide hair and all), (5) and one bear was shot and wounded but not recovered).

This takes into account 5 bears. In and amongst this mess 4 people are accused of committing a crime..two other people who worked for the State of Alaska and the State of Idaho were also there, and one of these guys shot one of the five bears shot (four recovered and one not).

Technically speaking, one of the state employees (either one) could have legally shot a black bear, taken its hide with claws attached and the skinned skull, and the meat (as requird before June 1) and had the skull and hide sealed, and still have been within the law..

I think the problem is that there were six people hunting (the guide, the guide's assistant, two hunters, and two undercover agents. Five bears were shot..one abandoned, so that leaves four..one wounded but not recovered, that leaves three, one bear shot but meat abondoned, that leaves two bears: at least one of these bears were taken legally (by the authorities by my guess), the last bear may or may not have been taken illegally. All depends on which law is applied.

This is a quick analysis. I could do a better job with a drawing, but this will have to do for now. If there are police performing illegal acts, I say hang the bastards.

Robert:
I agree. This seems to be a common practice when the cops are after a crooked guide.
I remember one "hotshot" crooked guide they charged with 1. Wanton waste, Caribou. 2. Wanton waste, fish. 3. Flying same day airborne, bear.
After the first illegal act, the planted warden kept offering more money to get the guide to continue breaking the law. It cost him a couple planes, jail time and several thousand dollars. I'm certainly not making excuses for the guide but, I think it is wrong for the warden not to charge him after the first illegal act.
I'd call it entrapment.

I also don't understand the need for the undercover agent to have to illegally kill an animal when on sting opperations, but I guess if they don't, then there really is nothing to charge the guide with.

I am for ADF&G stringintly enforcing the laws, and taking out the crooked folks. You can't even call this guy a crooked guide, as he wasn't a guide.

Paul:
Yep, thats how the system works. The wardens will go after a guide when they KNOW he is operating illegally. They will, at that point do ANYTHING they have to, to bring him to justice including illegal acts on their part. They are somehow immune from prosecution because they are after the "Bad Guy." I disagree with that. If the warden pulls the trigger, he goes to court along with the guide.

quote:

Four big game hunters accused of wildlife violations

By RACHEL D'ORO
ASSOCIATED PRESS WRITER

Notice how the liberal press uses the word "Hunters".

What ever happened to the word "Poachers".

But no...they are hunters just like you and I always ready to kill, mame and wound animals for the hell of it accourding to the press.

Secondly, I agree that officers should face charges if they poach even to catch a bad guy. If the guides are illegal thats it, they are running a illegal operation. A critter doesn't have to go down to prove that point.

I agree that something ant quite right with the game wardens killing the bear, but undercover cops sell drugs all the time. Maybe it was something like that. If they didn’t kill a bear there cover would have been blown. That's the thing about being a game warden, you know everyone your after has a gun and knows how to use it. That’s the sad thing about a news paper report you don’t get all the facts. Look they don’t even know the deference between a poacher and a hunter. I hope if they were wrong they are punished just like the poachers. They darn sure shouldn’t be entitled to the meat and the trophy. That just goes to show what a crappy news report this was, not enough facts and too many questions left unanswered. I would also think there were enough crimes committed before the first shot was fired to punish guys poseing as outfitter and guide. Sounds kinda like a warden from Idaho got a bear hunt in Alaska for nothing.

Shawn

How do we know if the game wardens did not have legal tags, and or did nothing wrong? Just because they are on a mission does not mean they can't harvest on their tags. Does it?

I don't know. But as a former law enforcement officer in the state of florida, I can tell you that the laws associated with a sting, are pretty vague and usely all inclusive. Anything to expose illegal activities.

I'm sure the agents were doing what was needed.

Sounds like the news reel left a lot of the "real" story out. Interesting discussion however...should undercover cops be "whacked" for selling dope, or doing prostitution stings?? Should a cop get busted for purchasing or possession of stolen property after making buys over and over from certain individuals who steal or burglarize homes?

It seems to me that these POS poachers needed to be stopped, and soon. The bear that the officer's shot was "sacraficed" to save countless numbers of other bears. Their job is tough enough protecting our wildlife resources, I give them the for a job well done.

Should the state's wildlife agencies' fish crews get busted for overlimits when they gill net lakes and reservoirs when they are trying to make our fisheries better?? Should a game warden get busted for shooting a crippled deer after a car hit it??

Interesting discussion...

MG

If the warden is posing as a hunter and "knowingly" violates the law just to ticket a guide, he should be prosecuted. If he then encourages the guide to commit more violations, he should be prosecuted for that also.
I knew a warden who hid in the grass and watched a group of fishermen snag a bunch of fish. Snagging in this area is illegal. Do you think maybe, he should have done his job and announced his presence after the first illegal act was committed? Nope. Thats not how it works. To make their record look good, they like to wait until more violations are committed.
Netting fish and shooting a crippled deer are a different story.

Isn't a cop posing as a drug dealer "knowingly" violating the law when he sells or buys??...should he get to go in front of the judge also? Aren't women cops who pose as hookers looking to arrest jons breaking the law just as much as the real deal (besides the acts), isn't the intent the same? Don't cops frequently encourage more sales of drugs during undercover operations to make more arrests??
The press release was pretty vague...I don't think they put this whole deal together just to write a one citation. There is more to this story.

MG

seems to me that if the cops had a tag they could shoot a bear. it was black bear, and there is no guide requirement so if only one bear was taken by any one cop i don't see any violation.

now, if we called those n'er do wells terrorists then the cops could do anything they wanted to bust 'em

Lot of play on words here- but doesn't one have to be hunting to be poaching? And really, unless a hunter is subsistance hunting , meat hunting to feed himself or his family and friends, isn't he hunting "just for the hell of it"? Just for the fun of it? Isn't that why it's called a "sport" I remember a video circulating around in which Saeed shoots half a herd of buffalo, was he hunting because he had to feed his wealthy family, was he getting paid for the meat and horns? He was enjoying hunting ( well the guides and trackers did the hunting) and killing animal after animal.

Let's don't be phony about it, hell it's in our genes and instincts. We, as men enjoy combat and the competition. That's why we enjoy football, boxing, soccer & wrestling.

It's our natural instinct to kill, because we got our food that way for jillions of years.

Before one critisizes a hunter who was enthusiastic about killing, look at saeed's and all the other hunting videos, think about all the fun times blazing away and blasting bunnies.

Did the clients know the phony guide was operating illegally? That anything they did was illegal? If they didn't know, they were his victims too. If they did then they are as guilty as he is. Thats for the courts and investigators to sort out, not you or I.

How many hunters have wounded an animal that got away?

How many of you put black bear meat in the freezer knowing full well that neither you or your family would eat the damn stuff, just to satisfy the law, then took it to the dump after a respectful amount of time had passed? Isn't there still a violation of our wanton waste law, technically?

As for the phony guide, he should be hung out to dry for fraud, as his scam was basically for defrauding, and ripping off honest people. He's basically a stinking thief.

Shouldn't need any more than that. Wayne