Resource Related Infractions and Punishment...

[Guest ThisPlaceSucks]

Yet another round of fines has been issued for hunting related infractions...

It amazes me that having a beer on the ice (not driving) will get me a 150 dollar fine, but someone who hunts with no license get's 300 dollars? What's wrong with this picture?

 

NEWS RELEASES

 

MINISTRY OF

NATURAL RESOURCES

 

*************************

Illegal bear export results in fines of $4,640

 

(February 25, 2011) - Three men from the United States have been fined a total of $4,640 for attempting to export three black bears into the United States without provincial export permits.

 

Samuel Sterk of Grandville, Michigan was fined $1,760 for exporting a black bear without a permit and abandonment of wildlife.

 

Jeffrey Kroll of Allendale, Michigan, was fined $2,000 for exporting a black bear without a permit, abandonment of wildlife and hunting with an illegal shotgun.

 

Thomas Sterk of Grandville, Michigan, was fined $880 for exporting a black bear without a permit.

 

Court heard that the three hunters were returning from a bear hunt in the White River area when they were stopped by a joint forces enforcement check at the Sault Ste. Marie border by Ministry of Natural Resources conservation officers and Canada Border Services Agency enforcement officers.

 

The hunters did not have the required export permits to legally export the black bears into the United States.

 

In addition, officers learned that both Samuel Sterk and Jeffrey Kroll made no attempt to salvage the meat from the bears that they shot.

 

Kroll also hunted his black bear with an unplugged shotgun.

 

Justice of the Peace James Bubba heard the case in the Ontario Court of Justice, Sault Ste. Marie, on February 23, 2011.

 

To report a natural resources violation, call 1-877-TIPS-MNR (847-7667) toll-free any time or contact your local ministry officer during regular business hours.

 

You can also call Crime Stoppers anonymously at 1-800-222-TIPS (8477).

 

*************************

Fined $700 for hunting moose without a licence

 

(February 25, 2011) - A South Porcupine man has been fined a total of $700 for hunting moose without a licence and for misleading a conservation officer.

 

Thomas Vincent was found guilty on both charges and fined $300 for hunting without a licence and $400 for making a false statement to a conservation officer.

 

The court heard that on November 3, 2009, a Ministry of Natural Resources conservation officer from Timmins District was checking vehicles in McNeil Township, about 45 kilometres south of Timmins.

 

The officer stopped a vehicle in which Vincent was a

passenger.

 

Vincent had a high-powered rifle with him, but neither he nor the driver could produce a moose hunting game seal authorizing them to hunt moose.

 

Vincent said that he had forgotten his game seal at home.

 

The officer was later unable to contact Vincent by phone or in person to verify his claim.

 

Further investigation revealed that Vincent had shot and tagged a calf moose with his game seal almost a month earlier, on October 13, 2009.

 

The case was heard by Justice of the Peace Theodore Hodgins in the Ontario Provincial Court, Timmins, on February 17, 2011.

 

The ministry reminds hunters that when hunting big game in Ontario, they must have a valid Outdoors Card with a current moose, deer or bear validation tag with them, and be able to produce the tag if a conservation officer asks to see it.

 

The tag must be accompanied by the corresponding game seal. Once a hunter harvests a big game animal, he or she must immediately affix that game seal to the animal and notch out the correct date and time of the kill.

 

To report a natural resources violation, call 1-877-TIPS-MNR (847-7667) toll-free any time or contact your local ministry officer during regular business hours.

 

You can also call Crime Stoppers anonymously at 1-800-222-TIPS (8477).

[tb4me]

300? Thats it I would have thought hunting without a licence would have ebbn a way worse fine then that..

Edited March 1, 2011 by tb4me

[Cookslav]

Thats ridiculous...they all got off pretty easy if you ask me.

[Guest ThisPlaceSucks]

Thats ridiculous...they all got off pretty easy if you ask me.

 

agreed 100%...

 

AGAIN this weekend at my uncles camp the CO's were present trying to bust people with petty fines like tipups in front of the camp (which is NOT illegal BTW) or having a beer in front of the camp with neighbours. It's not even my camp and I've seen them 3 times this winter.

 

As oppose to patrolling the district of Algoma (which is quite large) they are patrolling the handful of stocked lakes 20 minutes from town because of the high number of cottagers. Why you ask? Because it's costs very little in gas and even less in costs preparing for court etc... therefore it generates more money than it costs. Leave the petty fines to overzealous police officers.. We've got enough of those that we don't need overzealous CO's.

 

This weekend when we saw the female CO doing a patrol alone on a little Ski Doo Tundra. We joked after she left that she better not ever break down out there because the cottagers are so fed up, we doubt anyone would help her.

Edited March 1, 2011 by Dr. Salvelinus

[Rod Caster]

Sad to see the MNR's focus is on menial and controversial contraventions in your area. It's not likely they'll bust a perennial poacher when they visit the same few, high traffic lakes.

 

I haven't seen any CO's this year yet... when I do, I sure hope they don't bother me when I bring a couple beer for me and buddy on the ice over a 6 hour fishing trip. Especially after all the effort I expend following the fishing regs and practicing C & R on prize fish. I'm taking a chance that's for sure.

 

None the less I'm happy to see they are catching the people who think they can circumvent the angling and hunting regs.

[Cookslav]

the CO's were present trying to bust people with petty fines like tipups in front of the camp

 

Huh?...Why would they do that?

Are they trying to say they were unattended?

[Guest ThisPlaceSucks]

Huh?...Why would they do that?

Are they trying to say they were unattended?

 

Essentially yes. One cottager stuck up for the people and reminded the CO's of the wording of the law... I believe it's something like "clear unobstructed view" plus the 197 feet thing or whatever... Pretty sad! Haha!

 

I'm glad they make their presence felt, but they should be better informed of the laws they are enforcing. Essentially I think they should function more like a police officer, and less like a municipal by-law officer.

[Fishnwire]

I've got a camp north of Sudbury which is quite isolated. You need a good 4x4 truck for the road and a quad (or REALLY good 4x4) for the last 3.5 kms. There is only one other camp besides mine in there, and in the near decade I've been going there, I've seen a total of three parties (besides myself or my guests) come in there to fish. I'll see a couple of hunters every fall, but no one goes up there in the summer.

 

Two summers ago I was up there in the middle of the week, relaxing after an afternoon's fishing when I heard a quad approaching. Sure enough, it's a CO. He asked for my licence (which I didn't have...more on that later) and took a good look in my cooler when I offered him a water. Then he asked if I'd mind if he borrowed my boat and did a tour of my little lake (looking for nets or deadlines I guess?) and by the time he got back, it was starting to get dark. He still had a half hour on the bike before he'd get to his truck where he'd have to load up in the dark, and then drive the hour and a half back to town. I questioned (as politely as I could) why he choose to use the time and resources to come all the way in there to check out one camp. I wondered aloud if he wouldn't have a better chance catching people committing infractions in a location with more traffic. He told me that while that is true, often the worse violators committing the most serious crimes operate in remote areas. He told me that he had made a point of getting out to my camp every year, this just happened to be the first time we'd run into one another.

 

Here's the funny thing. After all the effort he put into getting out there, I didn't have my licence, and he told me to just bring it into the Ministry office when I got back to town. the REALLY funny thing is that it turned out (I’m very embarrassed to admit this) I didn't have a licence, having somehow forgot to buy one that year for the first time since I've needed one. I bought one right away, called up the CO and left a message on his voicemail saying as much. I told him to call me back and let me know how big I fine I owed and where and how I could pay it. He left a message on my machine basically saying, "Don't let it happen again, have a nice day."

 

I was really happy to be shown lenience, but I had to wonder...you'd think after going all the way in there, spending the time and burning the gas...he'd lay any legitimate fine he could. He had me "dead-to-rights" on fishing with no licence, and he let me off. I don't think COs (at least this one) worry too much about generating revenue through enforcement.

Edited March 1, 2011 by fishNwire

[Jer]

It would be pretty tacky to write you up after borrowing your boat. Did he offer gas money?

[Fishnwire]

It would be pretty tacky to write you up after borrowing your boat. Did he offer gas money?

 

 

At first he "asked" to borrow my canoe. I put quotation marks around "ask" because the way he phrased it (I forget exactly how) he basically said he required use of the canoe to perform his duties. It's my understanding that according to the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act (more specifically the Regs)..."When carrying out their duties, conservation officers may...require assistance to complete their inspections." You could probably interpret that to mean, "you have to loan them a canoe if there are three of them sitting unused on the shore next to your dock." When I said I had no problem with him using a canoe he then said, "Well I'd prefer to use your boat, would that be OK?" I said, "Go for it."

 

The motor was a little Suzuki 2.5 HP with no reverse...you just spin it around to go backwards. The CO started the motor (which was in neutral) and went to put it the reverse gear (which doesn't exist) but instead put it in forward...then he kind of panicked and gave a big shot of gas. He nearly put my boat up on the dock, avoided that and then almost ran the boat ashore. The boat and motor were unharmed, so it was kind of funny.

 

An even funnier story was the time I was coming out of camp and was stopped by a CO who wanted to check my coolers. They were all empty so no problems there. Then he asked where I work and when I told him it was at Vale (Vale-Inco at the time) which is the city's largest employer he gave me his card and suggested I call him if I ever hear about co-workers breaking fish and game laws. I wonder if working in a mine with guys who I've turned in to the MNR for infractions will make me feel more, or less safe on the job?????

Edited March 2, 2011 by fishNwire

[canadadude]

The press release is a little misleading, the hunter was fined $300 for not producing a valid game tag, he probably had a hunting Liscence but had already used his tag.The reason the fine is only $300 is because he did not kill a Moose without the proper tag, therefore the actual damages is lower, the fine would have been much higher if in fact a kill was made.

[Guest ThisPlaceSucks]

The press release is a little misleading, the hunter was fined $300 for not producing a valid game tag, he probably had a hunting Liscence but had already used his tag.The reason the fine is only $300 is because he did not kill a Moose without the proper tag, therefore the actual damages is lower, the fine would have been much higher if in fact a kill was made.

 

how is it misleading? i think it's quite clear if you read it.

he obviously DID have an outdoors card because he had used his moose tag a month previous to the incident in question.

 

my point is simply that a guy riding around trying to poach a moose with no tag should be the focus of the mnr, and he shouldn't be getting a comparable fine to a guy in front of his camp with a beer on the ice.