Call to Action--Wildlife Department

[44hunter45]

You may have killed it, but you did not "reduce it to possession". This is a legal term and it's important. This is why it was never yours.

 

[bowhunter_82]

Question- what did the landowner do with the deer? Did he move it at all without talking to the warden, or without tagging it?

I say you’re not getting that deer back, and have no legal recourse to do so. My questions are just out of curiosity.

Yes, the landowner moved the deer off the property. The Game Warden then met the landowner at location he moved it to.

 

[bowhunter_82]

People suck and many of the retrievals ends up being they shot the deer slightly on your side of the fence but proving that isn't easy. Even with a blood trail, they don't always start at the wounding site, etc.


Moral of the story some people suck and ruin it like everything else

Yes, people suck sometimes. I will say, that I filmed the kill shot so question of where the deer was when It was shot has never been a question. Sucks to lose a deer of that caliber that I will likely never have another opportunity to kill with a bow.

 

[BuzzH]

Few things, use a rifle next time, stay away from property lines, and maybe practice more with the bow.

I also feel like this whole issue wouldn't be one if not for antlers. Doubt the same level of "caring" and invested time would be the same with a doe.

You never possessed the deer, in which case you have zero legal claim to it. Better luck next time.

 

[bowhunter_82]

That buck will be hanging in the directors office soon enough!



Here
They can't give it back because it's "technically" not your deer. As bad as it sucks that deer was never legally tagged (due to circumstances out of your control) so it's not nor has it ever been anyone's private property. It's property of the state held in trust by the ODWC for the citizens of this state. No matter how much I or the game warden agree that you got a raw deal they're not gonna give you that deer. As weird as it sounds they have a legal obligation to not give you that deer. It was all over the moment the game warden couldn't talk the landowner in to letting you tag it. I believe that's where the "things would be different if it wasn't a 200 incher" comment came from. Really crappy move by the neighbor but big deer do weird things to people.



From a fellow okie who's worked at the ODWC.

Appreciate your insight and yes, people get weird with big deer.

 

[Bonasababy]

Hello fellow hunters and outdoorsmen,

I am writing to share a situation I am currently facing in Oklahoma and would appreciate your honest feedback. I believe this issue is something that could happen to any hunter, whether local or from out of state.

Recently, I shot a deer with my bow. The deer crossed onto a neighboring property before it expired. The landowner refused to allow me to retrieve it. We both contacted the Game Warden, who attempted to persuade the landowner to release the deer to me. When the landowner refused, the Game Warden seized the deer because the landowner could not legally tag it.

I am now struggling to get the Oklahoma Department of Wildlife Conservation (ODWC) to release the deer to me. During a meeting with the Game Warden Supervisor, he acknowledged that I shot the deer legally and ethically. However, he stated that because I never had physical possession of the animal, I did not "harvest" it, and therefore they cannot return it to me. He even suggested that this would not be an issue if it weren't a 200" deer.

I feel I am being penalized unfairly. The supervisor advised that I would need to hire an attorney and contact the Wildlife Director. I have since retained counsel and am waiting to schedule that meeting.

While I want the deer back, I am also concerned about the precedent this sets. If the Department’s stance is that "harvest" requires physical possession, it almost encourages hunters to trespass to gain that possession rather than following ethical and legal channels. I believe the ODWC should do the right thing and return the deer to the person who legally took it.

I intend to pursue legal action if necessary, but I wanted to get your opinions on this matter to ensure my perspective is reasonable.

Best regards

My take, FWIW, and I do sympathize with your situation.

State agencies have to follow the law.

AND they have to consider ramifications of their actions.

I assume they have the right to enter private land given their actions.

In an ultra conservative area, that right could be taken away by the legislature or by a court opinion if they did an end around and gave the deer back to you.

Unlikely? Well no, we had something just like that happen in my state.

That threat IMO is far more concerning than your understandable desire to get the deer you shot. Their right to enter private land helps dissuade poaching on private land. Losing that gives free reign to poachers on private land by landowners.

I would go so far as to say what they did was very sound from the standpoint of drawing a line in the sand against allowing landowners to take away an animal they did not legally harvest.

Would you be so concerned if it wasnt a trophy animal?

IMO your story might be useful in seeking a legislative change to state law, other states allow direct line retrieval with no weapons allowed on the private land. But even there, IMO theres a need to determine if that might be successful before you try, or wouldn't create a backlash with an even worse result.

 

[Rack Daniels]

One time I had a can of chew taken and put in the teachers desk….

Buddy snuck over and opened the desk, retrieved the chew, and I “beat the case” because of a “lack of evidence”!


Need a down homie with the ODFW


In all seriousness, that sucks ASS and I’m super bummed about your situation.
I agree with all the others, though, when it comes to the legal obligations… Surely you can understand the LEO’s perspective, even if the neighbors motive is frustrating/questionable.
It’s not your deer til it’s in YOUR possession. I hunt the hell out of private land boundaries and recognize the risks. Depending on the distance from that boundary and which way the deer typically come/go, I may or may not use a bow in that spot…

 

[bowhunter_82]

My take, FWIW, and I do sympathize with your situation.

State agencies have to follow the law.

AND they have to consider ramifications of their actions.

I assume they have the right to enter private land given their actions.

In an ultra conservative area, that right could be taken away by the legislature or by a court opinion if they did an end around and gave the deer back to you.

Unlikely? Well no, we had something just like that happen in my state.

That threat IMO is far more concerning than your understandable desire to get the deer you shot. Their right to enter private land helps dissuade poaching on private land. Losing that gives free reign to poachers on private land by landowners.

I would go so far as to say what they did was very sound from the standpoint of drawing a line in the sand against allowing landowners to take away an animal they did not legally harvest.

Would you be so concerned if it wasnt a trophy animal?

IMO your story might be useful in seeking a legislative change to state law, other states allow direct line retrieval with no weapons allowed on the private land. But even there, IMO theres a need to determine if that might be successful before you try, or wouldn't create a backlash with an even worse result.

I believe that the rules for retrieval in Oklahoma should be revised and yes, that would take a legislative change. We are a very pro private property state (which, I agree with 100%, as I am a landowner) but I also think you should be able to recovery an animal with either a game warden or sheriff etc. as long as they accompanied you during the retrieval.

 

[Dave N]

Care to post any pictures?

 

[bowhunter_82]

One time I had a can of chew taken and put in the teachers desk….

Buddy snuck over and opened the desk, retrieved the chew, and I “beat the case” because of a “lack of evidence”!


Need a down homie with the ODFW


In all seriousness, that sucks ASS and I’m super bummed about your situation.
I agree with all the others, though, when it comes to the legal obligations… Surely you can understand the LEO’s perspective, even if the neighbors motive is frustrating/questionable.
It’s not your deer til it’s in YOUR possession. I hunt the hell out of private land boundaries and recognize the risks. Depending on the distance from that boundary and which way the deer typically come/go, I may or may not use a bow in that spot…

I'm just frustrated...and yes, looking for that homie as we speak!

 

[bowhunter_82]

Care to post any pictures?

At this point I would rather not. But once I have exhausted all efforts, I will gladly post some pics so you guys can relish in the beauty of such an awesome animal.

 

[BuzzH]

I believe that the rules for retrieval in Oklahoma should be revised and yes, that would take a legislative change. We are a very pro private property state (which, I agree with 100%, as I am a landowner) but I also think you should be able to recovery an animal with either a game warden or sheriff etc. as long as they accompanied you during the retrieval.

Legislative changes are never easy, but can be done.

Not sure the taking a warden or sheriff would be something the legislature would be too keen on, in particular the sheriff. Not sure that's a good use of taxpayer money to be spending all season tracking wounded game for hunters via sheriff and wardens. There are solutions to be had, but just from experience you're going to get pushback and lots of questions.

Property lines are something you really have to pay attention to, as in glued to your onx. I wasn't paying close enough attention recently and could have gotten in trouble. Good reminder for me and everyone else to be really careful around property lines, stay glued to the ONX, GPS, whatever. If you're close to a private line make doubly sure you can secure the animal before it reaches the line, etc. Not always as easy as it sounds.

 

[bowhunter_82]

You may have killed it, but you did not "reduce it to possession". This is a legal term and it's important. This is why it was never yours.

The little devil on my left shoulder wants to start another constructive argument. What if you kill something but don't retrieve it. This could be any type of game animal/bird. If you never "harvested" had possession, how could one get a ticket for wanton waste or for not tagging the animal. (This question is just for fun--This is not what I believe in)

 

[SaskHunter]

Sucks OP, sounds like you're SOL. It absolutely blows my mind that after investigating and finding no wrong doing, that the CO will no give you the deer back.

I'm starting to see trends south of the border and it's a sick obsession with "property rights". People suing over "air space", silly trespassing disputes, preventing people from retrieving game on private property and literally leaving it to rot, CO's not returning game found on private because "it wasn't yours to start with", etc.

 

[R.K.]

Why did the landowner move the deer, where did they move it to, and did they attempt to reduce the deer (that they didn’t kill) to possession without tagging the animal?

 

[El Jason]

The little devil on my left shoulder wants to start another constructive argument. What if you kill something but don't retrieve it. This could be any type of game animal/bird. If you never "harvested" had possession, how could one get a ticket for wanton waste or for not tagging the animal. (This question is just for fun--This is not what I believe in)

There is a difference between killing and reducing to your possession. It’s important to understand definitions as they pertain to statutes.

 

[TOGIE]

Sucks OP, sounds like you're SOL. It absolutely blows my mind that after investigating and finding no wrong doing, that the CO will no give you the deer back.

I'm starting to see trends south of the border and it's a sick obsession with "property rights". People suing over "air space", silly trespassing disputes, preventing people from retrieving game on private property and literally leaving it to rot, CO's not returning game found on private because "it wasn't yours to start with", etc.

you may be better noticing the trend but it's not a new trend. more like an american tradition.

 

[SaskHunter]

you may be better noticing the trend but it's not a new trend. more like an american tradition.

I'm trying to be a little more tactful, pointing out facts has often lead to strong reactions reeking of "American excellence"...

 

[TOGIE]

I'm trying to be a little more tactful, pointing out facts has often lead to strong reactions reeking of "American excellence"...

By the same token, property rights do exist and with all their faults are still indeed a solid attribute of the USA. I do think OP is a SOL and needs to forget about it.

I think the trend that may indeed be developing is how much further folks are going in attempt to push back on where landowners may be getting a little over zealous with their property rights.

Overall, I think I agree that the property rights enthusiasm of the USA is definitely a bit off balance in the wrong direction.

 

[bowhunter_82]

Why did the landowner move the deer, where did they move it to, and did they attempt to reduce the deer (that they didn’t kill) to possession without tagging the animal?

No idea why the landowner moved the deer. From what I gathered from the Warden, the landowner moved the deer a couple of miles from the land it was recovered from and that's where the Wardens met him. From what the Warden told me, the landowner was also hunting the same deer and was just upset that someone else killed it, thus the reasoning why he wouldn't release it and ultimately the Warden having to take it. I do appreciate everyone's input on this situation--Want everyone to know that.