IFish Fishing Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.

Poacher loses guide license

15K views 41 replies 21 participants last post by  Snapt 
#1 ·
#5 ·
Unfortunately, it took a while to get the penalty raised to the existing level. On the positive side, the penalty IS at that level now. And it is being imposed. :flowered:

It has been an education process for legislators and others as to the impact of poaching on the hunting community, particularly in the area of opportunity being stolen from hunters as well as the resource being stolen from the state. :cool:

I tend to fall in line with your thinking on this subject; it was nice to get the bighorn sheep restitution moved from $25,000 to $50,000 but that is still less than 1/3 of the going rate for the auction tag. Plenty of room for improvement. :idea:

There exists a poster on this site who will argue that since the state doesn't have $7500 invested in the deer it is outrageous to have the penalty that high. :hoboy:

I wonder if MDF suspends one's membership in their organization for the same length as one's hunting license is suspended; I know OHA does. :wink:
 
#6 · (Edited)
According to this Oregon Revised Statute the Oregon State Marine Board had the opportunity to do exactly that and did not. :shrug:

The relevant portion of the statute:

704.040 Revocation of registration

(5) The board, in its discretion, may reprimand an outfitter and guide or suspend for up to 24 months, revoke or deny the registration of an outfitter and guide for any of the following:

(a) Conviction of a felony or misdemeanor related to the provision of services regulated by this chapter.

Pretty easy to introduce a bill that changes the word may to shall and removes the reprimand and suspend phrasing. :cool:
 
#10 ·
He is still listed as a broker at Whitney Land Company, as mentioned in the articles posted. I wonder how the Oregon Real Estate Agency will handle something like this? I am sure the owner of the real estate company is not too happy and does not speak well for the properties he represents.
 
#16 · (Edited)
HB 2883 is scheduled for a Work Session Thursday April 13.

An amendment will be under consideration that has multiple impacts; one of those would be to move the maximum 24 months stated by the OP to 60 months. :smash:

Another significant change to the original bill is the insertion of the phrase "or charged with" :bnews:

original bill text

proposed amendment text
 
#17 ·
I do not get the "charged" addition. Innocent until "proved guilty" is suppose to be the law of the land is it not ?


Don't care for the wording here, "discretion" should be removed to add "shall revoke". Conviction ! Revoke ! Period !
"the board, in its discretion, may reprimand an outfitter and guide or suspend for up to [24] 60 months, revoke or deny the registration of an outfitter and guide for any of the following:"
 
#20 ·
The -2 amendment referenced above is no longer posted online. :passout:

Now what will be considered tomorrow is the -3 amendment which appears to no longer contain the "is charged with" language.

Read it while it's hot off the online press. :D
 
#25 ·
A Public Hearing is scheduled for this bill on May 18 in the Senate Committee on Environment and Natural Resources. :nerd:

May 18 meeting was cancelled; this bill will now be heard on May 22.
 
#27 ·
HB 2883A was passed out of the Senate Committee on Environment and Natural Resources with a Do-Pass recommendation on a 4-0 vote with 1 excused.

It was passed on the Senate floor yesterday 28-0 with 2 excused. :)
 
#36 ·
Not to mention that the Oregon State Marine Board said they would deny a re-application for the guiding license while his hunting privileges were suspended, which happens to be for 3 years [emoji847]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
#37 · (Edited)
Men, I am not here to illicit a series of responses or light a fire by any means only to let you know a guides/outfitters license is not required when guiding on private lands in the state of Oregon. In this instance referring in fact to his own privately owned lands. Todd as well as all of us at Sheep Mountain Outfitters respect the Oregon State Police as well as the State Marine Board highly and work closely with them. The intricate details of Todd's case are irrelevant at this point in time and a public forum is not and will never be the place for them. While some of you may post as if he should burn at the cross, Todd is an incredible person, father, and friend who will always stanby and support.

Calvin Halladay
 
#41 · (Edited)
Calvin good post.

You are 100% correct a person does not need to have a guide license to guide on private ground. If this person or any individual wants to guide on private ground there is nothing the marine board can do about it. That is not the case in all states, but it is in Oregon. The only caveat would be if part of his sentence he wasn't allowed to be involved, then that is a whole different story.

I am like many people on here, poaching drives me nuts and i can get pretty emotional about the whole thing.

However in this case, and I don't know this individual, but it sounds like he made a really poor decision and he is paying for it through legal recourse. This world is full of really good people that make really dumb/poor decisions. In this case, some of you/us may not like the severity of that punishment he is facing for the decision, but if you want that level changed our system has ways for you to get involved to do just that.

In this case this man is paying his debt to society through a legal agreement made with an elected official that the electors put into office to represent them. If we/they don't like it then get involved and try to effect some change.

I for one hope he has learned his lesson and in the future he makes better decisions. Furthermore, once he is done paying for his transgressions i wish him and his company the best of luck.

Calvin good for you standing by your friend. Most would just try to put distance between themselves and the person that is In trouble.

Rodney Wood "aka" wildwood
 
#38 ·
I respect your loyalty.

Did Todd break the law?





P
 
#40 ·
"The intricate details of Todd's case are irrelevant at this point in time and a public forum is not and will never be the place for them."

I heartily disagree. In Oregon game animals are a public resource, not the chattles of a private landowner. Todd pled guilty to poaching (stealing) a public resource. If a public forum is not the place to discuss a crime aginst the public, where do you think the discussion should be held?

Your post makes it sound as though Sheep Mountain tacitly approves his unlawful action, thus ensuring that Sheep Mountain will make it onto my short list of outfitters to be avoided.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
Top