Judge Throws Out Missouri Some Hunting Regulations

[denjac]

August 13, 2010

Judge throws out Missouri some hunting regulations

From The Associated Press

ST. LOUIS — A southeast Missouri judge has ruled that state regulations prohibiting the use of dogs and vehicles in deer hunting are so vague that they are unconstitutional.

Missouri Department of Conservation spokesman Joe Jerek said Friday that department lawyers are still deciding whether to appeal the ruling handed down earlier this month by Ripley County Circuit Judge Robert Smith.

Ripley County hunters Neil Turner and Bobby “Shannon” Jones sued in February over the regulations, which prohibit such things as hunters driving through the woods or using dogs to scare deer out into the open, or shooting deer from a car. Violations are class A misdemeanors.

The regulations “are vague, overly broad, indefinite and fail to establish sufficient standards so that people of ordinary intelligence must necessarily guess at their meaning,” Smith wrote in the Aug. 5 ruling.

“In our area, hunting is not only for recreation but it is a part of our way of life and any infringement of this right must be constitutional,” Smith wrote.

At issue are Conservation Department regulations that prohibit the use of a “motor-driven air, land or water conveyances” while deer hunting. The department also has a regulation stating that deer may not be “hunted, pursued, taken or killed with the aid of dogs, in use or possession.”

“Big picture, these regulations are in place to help ensure ethical hunting and fair chase, and also, based on our scientific management, to help protect and sustain wildlife species,” Jerek said.

But Daniel Moore, an attorney for Turner and Jones, said the wording confuses both hunters and the conservation agents charged with enforcing the regulations.

“It left it up to the agent’s interpretation, and you can’t have a law applied based upon the feelings of a law officer,” Moore said. “Where it says you can’t pursue deer with the aid of a vehicle, who the hell knows what that means?”

Turner was arrested and faces federal charges after a 2008 undercover investigation into illegal hunting activities, known as “Operation Pulling Wool.” Moore said negotiations continue with federal prosecutors and he is hopeful the case will be settled before it goes to trial.

“We’re not against hunting regulations, but it’s just fair if you don’t know whether you’re in violation or not,” Moore said.

Jerek said the acts prohibited by the regulations are also covered by other laws and regulations, and “are still considered impermissible” despite the judge’s

[Trevor K]

Maybe it's just me, but I never thought those regulations were that vague.

[Chief Grey Bear]

It ain't just you. I understood them perfectly. And have for many years. Sounds like the judge likes to use his vehicle to chase deer to me.

[ollie]

What a load of crap! Oh, I forgot, laws are made for the minorty anymore. Any common sense has gone out the door.

[Outside Bend]

August 13, 2010

The regulations “are vague, overly broad, indefinite and fail to establish sufficient standards so that people of ordinary intelligence must necessarily guess at their meaning,” Smith wrote in the Aug. 5 ruling.

My favorite line in the whole article. I've spent a fair amount of time in Ripley Co, and would bet you can count the "people of ordinary intelligence," on one hand.

It's no secret that county has serious poaching/dog running issues, and its no secret game violations aren't enforced by judges and prosecutors in that county. My guess is if the case moves out of that region, it'll never stand a chance.

Has to be frustrating for the local agents and other enforcement folks, though.

[ozark trout fisher]

My favorite line in the whole article. I've spent a fair amount of time in Ripley Co, and would bet you can count the "people of ordinary intelligence," on one hand.

It's no secret that county has serious poaching/dog running issues, and its no secret game violations aren't enforced by judges and prosecutors in that county. My guess is if the case moves out of that region, it'll never stand a chance.

Has to be frustrating for the local agents and other enforcement folks, though.

I hunt every year down in Carter county and the deer doggers are a huge problem. I hunt exclusively on public land and just about every year a dog comes under my tree stand and ruins the hunt. I can't believe that judge said the regs were vague. They seem pretty darn clear to me. Now it just happens that they aren't generally followed in that part of the state, but that's a different issue entirely.

I don't know anything about that judge, but I'd say it's a pretty good bet that he has some buddies that dog deer and he wanted to help 'em out. The politics in south-central MO are a little interesting to say the least.

No wonder the deer population isn't very good down there.

[jdmidwest]

Have you heard the one about shooting the dogs that run deer yet???

I really thought it was pretty clear. Most of the locals around where I hunt know it is illegal, they take the collars off so they can't be identified. When they run deer on the farm, they are molesting my livestock and I have a right to.... At least that is how I interpret the law.

[Randall]

I don't know the law on shooting dogs, but it seems like you would have the same right to shoot a dog with no collar molesting your livestock as say a coyote.

I would also imagine that the judgment would be appealed by MDC. Just becuase that one judge ruled that the statute is vague doesn't make it so.

[Chief Grey Bear]

Have you heard the one about shooting the dogs that run deer yet???

I really thought it was pretty clear. Most of the locals around where I hunt know it is illegal, they take the collars off so they can't be identified. When they run deer on the farm, they are molesting my livestock and I have a right to.... At least that is how I interpret the law.

Yeah, I would blast the hell out them. How are they going identify that it is their dog anyway???? And what about the tresspass laws?????

[ozark trout fisher]

Have you heard the one about shooting the dogs that run deer yet???

I really thought it was pretty clear. Most of the locals around where I hunt know it is illegal, they take the collars off so they can't be identified. When they run deer on the farm, they are molesting my livestock and I have a right to.... At least that is how I interpret the law.

I don't shoot the dogs under my stand just because I don't have the heart to. I'm not a violent person, and the idea of shooting a dog is just well... I'm not going to do it any time soon. But it is very annoying, and I know some folks that would shoot a dog if it was under their stand.