Buck Hollow Sporting Goods - click or touch to visit their website Midwest Habitat Company

Poacher question

Fishbonker

Fishbonker

Life Member
To be considered “poached” does the item in question need to have been alive when poached?

So are sheds “poached” or stolen

I may be splitting hairs but I would like more information both legal and personal opinion on poached vs stolen before I go off on a tangent.

What do you think?

The ‘Bonker
 
I would agree with stolen and would also say that once they leave the whitetail they are no longer property of the state.
 
Poached has always ment to me: to take game illegally. Now shot in the spotlight, or killed legit and tagged and processed and just forgot to register it....Its all poached.

Sheds=stolen. However, like Limb said once they leave the whitetail they arent state property...what if they land on public ground?
 
If the state would ever get to the point of charging a fee for shed hunting(anything is possible) would they then be state property?
 
Limb Chicken said:
I would agree with stolen and would also say that once they leave the whitetail they are no longer property of the state.
Click to expand...


Unless they are in a State Park? I know of State Preserves where no hunting is allowed and always wondered how they would handle shed hunting there.
 
What Limb said seems logical. Once they're on the ground I would think they are in the same category as mushrooms. Can you hunt mushrooms in state parks?
 
Good question and some good answers. Not sure what is the correct answer but am anxiously awaiting Fishbonker's Tangent :) This ought to be good.
 
I would agree with stolen once they are shed. I'm not sure about IA laws, but in AZ, if you remove antlers from a road kill without a slavage tag from AZGFD, its considered poaching antlers (vs theft) and is punishable. But Bonker's question is about sheds, so I'm guessing that is irrelevant. I don't know about the state parks in Iowa, but I feel I should at least go on record letting you all know that collecting sheds from National Park Service Land (Nationa Park, National Monument, or National Conservation Area) is illegal and a Federal offense. I know of at least one NPS property up there (Effigy Mounds NM). BLM National Monuments are different (you don't have those up there), but I recently helped clarify the NPS lands question for some friends that were told they could shed hunt in Grand Canyon NP. Just thought I'd pass on more info to help keep you all out of trouble up there!
 
I shed hunt state parks all the time. The rangers don't care. I would say the sheds are stolen off your property however the term Shed Poacher is typically used. Just sounds better than the other.
 
Skully said:
Unless they are in a State Park? I know of State Preserves where no hunting is allowed and always wondered how they would handle shed hunting there.
Click to expand...

National parks or preserves you can't take anything off the land but some have exceptions if you find the right parks. Just think of all the sheds sitting in them national parks getting chewed up by tree rats...
 
According to a state judge that deals with dnr hearings, state land including state preserves, sheds and shrums are fare game. mushrooms dont fall under the living organism clause where you cant pick flowers, cut trees, or remove so on and so forth. Im not sure about federal land but i think chickens right, once sheds fall off a deer they are considered debris. I think sheds are stolen from private lands and not poached but shed poaching sounds so much better than shed stealling. But oviouslly im not an english major!
 
buckaddict said:
Im not sure about federal land but i think chickens right, once sheds fall off a deer they are considered debris.
Click to expand...

It is going to depend on the Federal land management agency. Some FWS National Wildlife Refuges will allow you to pick up sheds. All BLM and Forest Service lands are fair game. ALL lands administered by the National Park Service are completely OFF LIMITS to shed hunting and, if caught, you will be arrested on sight. NPS considers them a natural resource the same as the rocks and sticks you cannot pick up and bring home (36 CFR) I had to verify all of this a month ago after some friends were told by someone at the AZGFD that they could pick up sheds in a National Park. :thrwrck:
 
My thought process may be a bit skewed, which is nothing unusual, but I was thinking about the poaching of black rhinos for their horns and elephants for their ivory. They were poached for a body part only and left to rot. Well, so are several hundred, perhaps even thousands of bucks in Iowa. Killed for a body part and left to rot. So that is apples to apples unless you consider the endangered species aspect.

Anyway, I was thinking if we could elevate the “stealing” of sheds to the “poaching of a body part” by rule or law it could afford the land owner more protection or recourse. If shed stealing is considered actual poaching of a body part then the COs and TIP could get involved and TIP could offer rewards.

Unfortunately though, the way I read it and from the comments made in the thread an animal has to die and a body part taken for the act to be considered poaching. So animals are not harmed in the natural process of shedding and it would not be considered poaching to take a shed nor would it be considered “stealing” if a shed is considered “timber debris” or “refuse”. So the only protection a landowner has is laws against trespassing.

A trespasser crossing a fence to take a shed is much different than a thief opening your front door and taking a shed. The object being stolen is the same, the place it is being stolen from is different. Why can’t crossing a fence be considered breaking and entering?

So the two things I would like to see happen is elevate sheds to body parts and therefore poaching and elevate trespassing for purpose of conversion of property to the same as breaking and entering. I’m sure there are tons of unintended consequences to this. There always are, and the unintended consequences may be worse than what we have now.
 
Your comparing horns to antlers. Shed antlers would not be considered a body part after they have been discarded from the animal. I understand where you are coming from (kinda :D) but I think it would be a stretch.
 
IMO crossing a fence to steal shed should not be the same as breaking into your house to steal something. I agree that what they took should be treated the same, but I consider someone breaking into my house as a threat to mine as well as my fanilies life. I do not feel threatened by soneone hoping my fence to take a shed. I do believe the fine should be much higher than it is for treaspassing. JMO.
 
ARbowhtr said:
IMO crossing a fence to steal shed should not be the same as breaking into your house to steal something. I agree that what they took should be treated the same, but I consider someone breaking into my house as a threat to mine as well as my fanilies life. I do not feel threatened by soneone hoping my fence to take a shed. I do believe the fine should be much higher than it is for treaspassing. JMO.
Click to expand...


seems it would be a very sticky situation to me. one that the law makers dont want a part of.
what about the very very small percentage of guys that do loose there dog on to another property, Ive never heard of a dog running off and getting into someones house:rolleyes: or what about the land owners that have fences laying down, or no fences at all. would it be breaking and entering if you found yourself a couple hundred feet on the wrong side because there is no fence?
I do however think if a property is properly fenced, and posted most if not all cases of tresspassing is pretting black and white and there should be stiffer fines, but theres always going to be that grey area which there is not with someones home.
 
Just reading a few of the old post when I came acroos this one, As far as tresspassing goes property does not have to be posted to charge someone with tresspassing. You don't need to put a "no tresspassing" sign on your front door to keep strangers from entering your home. Same goes for your property.
 
antlerfreak said:
seems it would be a very sticky situation to me. one that the law makers dont want a part of.
what about the very very small percentage of guys that do loose there dog on to another property, Ive never heard of a dog running off and getting into someones house:rolleyes: or what about the land owners that have fences laying down, or no fences at all. would it be breaking and entering if you found yourself a couple hundred feet on the wrong side because there is no fence?
I do however think if a property is properly fenced, and posted most if not all cases of tresspassing is pretting black and white and there should be stiffer fines, but theres always going to be that grey area which there is not with someones home.
Click to expand...
If your dog runs off to another property and doesn't return; you contact the owner of the other property. What do dog owners in the city do when their dog runs away? Certainly they don't go wondering around yards and private property looking for them!
Also there is no law requiring landowners to fence their property. Why should there be? If you are a couple hundred feet on the wrong side of a property line; you have no business being there in the first place! I fail to see any grey area in tresspassing at all. What's your's is your's, and what's mine is mine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom