Sportsman's Blog

Rubutting A Blog Post On Trapping

This blog post is in direct response to Bill Klein’s recent posting on Club Outdoors where he describes an incident involving his dog getting caught in a trap.   You can read his comments HERE in their entirety.

First off, I want to begin by saying that I deeply regret that Bill’s new black lab, Doc, got caught in a trap and that Bill had to endure this truly unfortunate experience.   I can understandably appreciate why he is upset about the events, however, I take great umbrage to the manner in which he channels his emotion.   Let me repeat so this is NOT FORGOTTEN.   I regret Bill had to endure this experience with his black lab and I do not want this statement lost in any of the comments I am about to make in this rebuttal.

I don’t know much about trapping but this much I do know:  whoever wrote the ad appearing in the DNR’s Minnesota Hunting and Trapping Regulations Handbook teaching “how to release a domestic animal from a trap” has never actually faced that situation.

Bill, first off, the instructions featured on page 53 of the 2009 Minnesota Hunting and Trapping Regulations Handbook describes a procedure on how to release a domestic animal from a body-gripping trap (often called a Conibear trap).   The reason these instructions are even included in the synopsis is because this type of trap, when used properly, is intended to kill the animal that is caught.   In other words, time is of the essence in removing the animal and if you’re not familiar with the operation of such a trap this paid advertisement by the Minnesota Trappers Association offers some basic information towards that end.

…The Minnesota Trappers Association ad in the rule book says: Step One: Remain calm and speak soothingly to the dog.  There’s our first clue that the ad writer is clueless.

As a long-time member of the Minnesota Trappers Association I can assure you this assertion made on your part is totally without merit.   The leaders of the MTA are some of the most upstanding and experienced trappers to be found anywhere in this country.   Their advice is sound and proven.   Again, your leg hold trap shown in the picture IS NOT the same type of trap for which this paid advertisement explains a release procedure.   This should be evident by comparing the instructional graphics to your picture.

I ultimately had to leave my dog trapped, run home, get a bolt cutter and my tractor, cut the trap chain and carry Doc, with trap still attached, home in the bucket of my tractor.  A crow bar finally freed him.

With all due respect, as someone familiar with traps and trapping, your choice of actions were a gross over reaction in my estimation.   Cutting the trap chain and carrying the dog (with trap still attached) home in the bucket of a tractor—you really think these actions were necessary, not to mention safe for the dog?   Furthermore, the manner in which YOU CHOSE to handle this situation sensationalizes an already unfortunate incident.   Seriously, a “crow bar” to free your dog?   C’mon, Bill…if you used such equipment to open a leg-hold trap you likely inflicted unnecessary pain on your dog by attempting to pry the jaws apart.   I’m sorry if you couldn’t get the jaws opened by simply stepping on the release levers…but in my experience it takes very little effort or strength to accomplish this task.   Oh, and by the way…I have a trap shed with dozens of traps just like the one shown.   Many have 4–springs and not just 2 like the one that caught Doc.   I know what I’m talking about.

Next day I found the trapper and determined he had no license, no ID on his traps, was setting his snare traps far above 16” off the ground, was setting traps in deer trails and, finally, gave me a false name.

Did you call the Conservation Officer and get him involved?   There’s no mention of that happening in your story.   You state how you found the trapper and how you determined he had no license.   It just seems to me that had a CO been acting in this capacity rather than you our sporting community as a whole would have been much better off.   Not only was this guy trespassing, he did not have proper identification on his traps plus a whole host of other law violations.   You state he gave you a false name.   Wonderful.   Too bad the name wasn’t given to the CO instead, because that would have been yet another law violation.   To you…he’s under no legal obligation to provide any of those facts.   To a law enforcement officer he cannot lie.

But the bigger issue here is whether dry land snare and spring loaded traps should be allowed at all in the Twin City seven-county area.  Certainly trapping has its place.  But is that place where people and dogs are likely to confront them?

The point totally being missed in your assertion that trapping should be outlawed is how you encountered one law violator and chose to paint the entire trapping community with negativism and misguided information for the sole purpose to make a point in your blog post.

 

Okay, Bill…let me ask you this.   Forget everything I’ve just said and let’s change this scenario just a bit.   If rather than a trapper let’s say a wandering pheasant hunter was on your property and broke a window in your shed with stray pellets…would you call for the abolishment of pheasant hunting?   Or how about a deer hunter who shoots at a deer clearly on your property when he’s hunting a neighbor’s land?   Should we do away with deer hunting because a few individuals each year engage in unethical and illegal activities in their sport?

 

I guess more than anything I’m deeply disappointed in your breaking the unwritten sportsman’s code of behavior by letting your emotions clearly cloud your good judgment.   Rather than focus on the criminal acts and call them out solely for what they were…instead you chose to condemn a very proud, responsible and legal trapping heritage that many of us enjoy without these sort of incidents.

 

Indeed, in my opinion, your decision to focus disparaging remarks directed toward the trapping community as a whole is equally as unfortunate as the incident that most recently occurred to your dog, Doc.

CLUB OUTDOORS: Appreciating their courage behind the badge

Minnesota has a fine corps of Conservation Officers who perform a superb job of protecting our fields, forests and waters from abuse and misuse. During this period of Thanksgiving, here's a tip-of-the-hat to these unsung heroes who deserve more appreciation from those of us who enjoy a quality outdoor experience.

Click HERE to read more.

©2009 Jim Braaten.   All Rights Reserved.   No Reproduction without Prior Permission.

Minnesota has a fine corps of Conservation Officers who perform a superb job of protecting our fields, forests and waters from abuse and misuse. During this period of Thanksgiving, here's a tip-of-the-hat to these unsung heroes who deserve more appreciation from those of us who enjoy a quality outdoor experience.

Click HERE to read more.

©2009 Jim Braaten.   All Rights Reserved.   No Reproduction without Prior Permission.

Minnesota has a fine corps of Conservation Officers who perform a superb job of protecting our fields, forests and waters from abuse and misuse. During this period of Thanksgiving, here's a tip-of-the-hat to these unsung heroes who deserve more appreciation from those of us who enjoy a quality outdoor experience.

Click HERE to read more.

©2009 Jim Braaten.   All Rights Reserved.   No Reproduction without Prior Permission.

Minnesota has a fine corps of Conservation Officers who perform a superb job of protecting our fields, forests and waters from abuse and misuse. During this period of Thanksgiving, here's a tip-of-the-hat to these unsung heroes who deserve more appreciation from those of us who enjoy a quality outdoor experience.

Click HERE to read more.

©2009 Jim Braaten.   All Rights Reserved.   No Reproduction without Prior Permission.

Minnesota has a fine corps of Conservation Officers who perform a superb job of protecting our fields, forests and waters from abuse and misuse. During this period of Thanksgiving, here's a tip-of-the-hat to these unsung heroes who deserve more appreciation from those of us who enjoy a quality outdoor experience.

Click HERE to read more.

©2009 Jim Braaten.   All Rights Reserved.   No Reproduction without Prior Permission.

Minnesota has a fine corps of Conservation Officers who perform a superb job of protecting our fields, forests and waters from abuse and misuse. During this period of Thanksgiving, here's a tip-of-the-hat to these unsung heroes who deserve more appreciation from those of us who enjoy a quality outdoor experience.

Click HERE to read more.

©2009 Jim Braaten.   All Rights Reserved.   No Reproduction without Prior Permission.

Minnesota has a fine corps of Conservation Officers who perform a superb job of protecting our fields, forests and waters from abuse and misuse. During this period of Thanksgiving, here's a tip-of-the-hat to these unsung heroes who deserve more appreciation from those of us who enjoy a quality outdoor experience.

Click HERE to read more.

©2009 Jim Braaten.   All Rights Reserved.   No Reproduction without Prior Permission.

Minnesota has a fine corps of Conservation Officers who perform a superb job of protecting our fields, forests and waters from abuse and misuse. During this period of Thanksgiving, here's a tip-of-the-hat to these unsung heroes who deserve more appreciation from those of us who enjoy a quality outdoor experience.

Click HERE to read more.

©2009 Jim Braaten.   All Rights Reserved.   No Reproduction without Prior Permission.

Minnesota has a fine corps of Conservation Officers who perform a superb job of protecting our fields, forests and waters from abuse and misuse. During this period of Thanksgiving, here's a tip-of-the-hat to these unsung heroes who deserve more appreciation from those of us who enjoy a quality outdoor experience.

Click HERE to read more.

©2009 Jim Braaten.   All Rights Reserved.   No Reproduction without Prior Permission.

Minnesota has a fine corps of Conservation Officers who perform a superb job of protecting our fields, forests and waters from abuse and misuse. During this period of Thanksgiving, here's a tip-of-the-hat to these unsung heroes who deserve more appreciation from those of us who enjoy a quality outdoor experience.

Click HERE to read more.

©2009 Jim Braaten.   All Rights Reserved.   No Reproduction without Prior Permission.

Minnesota has a fine corps of Conservation Officers who perform a superb job of protecting our fields, forests and waters from abuse and misuse. During this period of Thanksgiving, here's a tip-of-the-hat to these unsung heroes who deserve more appreciation from those of us who enjoy a quality outdoor experience.

Click HERE to read more.

©2009 Jim Braaten.   All Rights Reserved.   No Reproduction without Prior Permission.

Trophy buck illegally shot in Goodhue County

NEWS RELEASE (MN DNR): For Immediate Release

 

State conservation officers recently seized a record-book deer rack and filed poaching charges against a Cannon Falls man.

The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources investigation stemmed from an incident where three deer, including a trophy 8-point buck were killed by archery in three separate incidents near Cannon Falls in October.

According to the complaint, Troy Alan Reinke, 32, admitted to conservation officers that he had shot a small doe and a small buck on separate dates in early October, and failed to tag or register either of the deer. Reinke said he shot the large 8-point buck, with a 185 green score, on Halloween evening. A green score is an unofficial score to rate deer antlers (inches of length).

Conservation officers seized a bow, two deer racks, the meat from the three deer, and the hide from the large buck as part of their investigation. 

Restitution for the small buck and doe is $500 each. Restitution for the trophy buck is $1,000.

Reinke also faces other fines and court costs, and could have his hunting privileges revoked for three years if convicted. A trial date has not been set.

Anyone witnessing wildlife or fishing code violations is encouraged to contact the nearest conservation officer, law enforcement agency or the toll-free Turn-In-Poacher (TIP) hotline at 800-652-9093. Also, #TIP is available to most cell phone users in Minnesota.

People should contact the Minnesota State Patrol or a DNR regional or area office for the name and phone number of a conservation officer in their area.

 

(Click on picture to enlarge)            MN DNR Photo Provided.

 

©2009 Jim Braaten.   All Rights Reserved.   No Reproduction without Prior Permission.

Are Hunters Being Driven Away From Our Sport By Too Many Regulations?

Recently a well-known outdoors writer from Minnesota lamented how the deer hunting regulations were getting so cumbersome that it took several hours of reading through them the night before deer season began just to understand them.   Others in attendance at the meeting were quick to point out that it was probably foolish for him to wait until the night before the season opened to finally start looking them over.   Yet, the point remains why is it necessary for the game laws and regulations to be so damn confusing.

When I started hunting deer in Minnesota back in the 1970’s the rules and regulations were contained in just small pamphlets.   Oh sure, to be fair, big game, small game, waterfowl and trapping regulations were contained separately in small pamphlets no more than about 12 pages long each.   Today, however, everything is combined into one book and for 2008 it just so happens to be 130 pages long.

I’m sure this problem is not isolated to Minnesota, either.   Around the country I hear sportsmen complain how things just aren’t as simple as they used to be.   Is it possible we’ve regulated our hunting, fishing and trapping seasons so aggressively that you need to be a 2^nd year law student just to interpret them?   Some folks would likely think so.

Recently about 50 goose hunters from Minnesota had their records expunged and fines that were paid returned due to a misinterpretation of the migratory waterfowl law during the early goose season (read more HERE).   They were improperly cited due to a loophole in the law that allowed unplugged shotguns and electronic calls during part of the season the past three years.   In other words, here’s proof that even those charged to enforce the game laws can make mistakes through improper interpretation.

Early last spring the Minnesota DNR announced it was going to make some of the most dramatic changes to the big game hunting regulations seen in several decades.   Why?   In one word…to “simplify” them.   The licensing menu had taken on too many options.   Certain seasons existed in zones that made little sense to wildlife managers.   Certain tagging and game validation requirements were ripe for change.   So change was instituted even though many hunting traditionalists resisted the radical deer season changes.

So, here we have the 2008 hunting regulations book (you can see a copy by clicking HERE).   All 130 pages of rules, regulations and advertisements (of course in the download version those pages show up as intentionally left blank).   At first glance there isn’t much to it that strikes me as being simplified.   I predict it will take me even longer this fall to acquaint myself with all the new rules and changes I must learn as a hunter and trapper.

But let’s step back from the specifics and look at things more generally speaking.   Put yourself in the shoes of a new hunter.   Back 30 years ago most of the laws and regulations one had to learn were basic and made sense.   Contrast that to what we have now.   There’s actually a section in the rules explaining “HOW TO BUY A FIREARMS DEER LICENSE.”   That’s right.   Thirty years ago the pamphlet would have simply listed the price for the deer license.   Today, the DNR finds it necessary to issue a lengthy explanation as to how to buy the right license.

Let’s shift gears here for just a bit.   Last week I attended a District 8 meeting for the Minnesota Trappers Association where the discussion focused on Minnesota’s mandatory youth trapper education requirement.   All persons born after Dec. 31, 1989 who have never purchased a trapping license must attend a free class before they are validated and can purchase a trapping license.   Problem is the program relies on volunteer instructors and finding a class has been a problem for some youth.   End result…NO class taken…NO trapping is allowed (in MN).

Now don’t get me wrong, I think the concept of trapper education is a wonderful one.   I wish they had it back when I started trapping at the age of 12.   I had to learn on my own.   I made mistakes.   I had nobody to teach me.   Problem is if I would have had to take one of these mandatory classes back in 1975 I would have probably abandoned the sport altogether.   A 12–year old can’t drive.   My mother who was then recently widowed wouldn’t have taken me to an all-day class 20 or 30 miles away.   It just wouldn’t have happened.   Bottom line…I would have never taken up trapping…hence I probably wouldn’t have developed a keen interest in the outdoor world…and right now I would be blogging about (heaven forbid) movies or some other mundane topic like that.

In closing, I just want to say that I think it’s time our state game departments get back to the basics before it’s too late.   As sportsmen we have enough attrition and general decline in our participation numbers we don’t need to find further ways to turn people off to our sport.   It shouldn’t take all night to read the regulation book just to comply with how we need to legally conduct ourselves afield.   Besides being confusing, it can downright take some of the fun out of the sport.

I pride myself on knowing the game and fish laws and following them very closely.   It’s the way I chose to live outdoors AND how I chose to pass that ethic on to the next generation around me.   I’ve grown accustomed to hunting and fishing regulations being increasingly burdensome to us sportsmen.   Yet, I think it’s time some big changes need to occur before it’s simply too late and more sportsmen quit out of utter frustration.

2008 Jim Braaten. All Rights Reserved. No Reproduction without Prior Permission.

Tags: Hunting+regulations, fishing+regulations

Out of Tragedy Inexcusable Mistakes Were Allegedly Made

Just a quick follow-up to my last post about the turkey hunter who mistakingly shot and killed his 8–year old son.   While I am not trying to dismiss, in any way, the tragic circumstances of this situation, it is now becoming more apparent the father made some serious mistakes allegedly not based on poor judgment alone.

An earlier Minneapolis StarTribune article suggested the father was not even licensed properly to be out turkey hunting and was trespassing on someone else’s property.   As if that action wasn’t bad enough, today now additional details of the incident were released stating the father has been shown to have been under the influence of alcohol (Breathalizer reading = .06) and urine testing showing the detectable presence of marijuana in his system.

While my heart goes out to the family who tragically lost a young loved one, the more I read of this incident the less I can sympathize with the father, despite his poor actions.   Indeed, the father may have been out hunting but NONE of his actions exemplify the kind of sportsmen with whom I associate.

2008 Jim Braaten. All Rights Reserved. No Reproduction without Prior Permission.

Tags: hunting+accident

Landowners Take A Hit Thanks To Careless Hunters

Unfortunately, we read about it happening most every fall.   You know what I mean…the news story that hits the wire describing a hunter’s errant bullet harming or perhaps killing some innocent person quite some distance away from the woods.   Those type of incidents are truly horrendous, and certainly not something any of us like to hear about—whether hunter or non-hunter alike.   Yet, to some extent, in life there’s no getting away from the fact that accidents will occur.   To believe otherwise is simply foolhardy given the number of hunters that take to the woods each fall.

Case in point happened last fall out in Pennsylvania.   Craig Wetzel was deer hunting on a farm when he shot at a deer.   The projectile apparently missed the deer and instead found an 18–year old pregnant woman sitting in a car in her driveway 1/2 mile away from where the shot took place.   The bullet grazed the young woman’s head fracturing her skull…but fortunately not killing her.   Today, the young victim is physically on the mend.

But this story doesn’t quite end there.   Nope, the victim sued the shooter and just a few weeks ago was awarded what will likely end up being a substantial negligence award.   You might say…well, that seems fair.   And thus far I would tend to agree.   But in that Pennsylvania courtroom the jury went a step further and found that the landowner who allowed the hunting to take place to be partly at fault.   In this case of contributory negligence the hunter was found to be 90% liable and the landowner, who was not involved in the hunting act, was found to be the final 10% at fault.

Oh, but it grows much worse than that.   In Pennsylvania the next phase of the trial will be another jury who will determine what type of damages the victim should receive.   Experts who have followed this case closely have speculated something that is almost unimaginable that might eventually happen.   Allegedly Mr. Wetzel is mostly judgment proof meaning that even if money was awarded you can’t squeeze blood out of a turnip.   If Wetzel doesn’t have the money to cover the potential jury award…then the landowner who is likely more flush with assets could possibly bear 100% of this final jury award.   Under Pennsylvania law—which does not necessarily mean the facts of this case could be construed in this very same manner in your particular state—there is a real possibility the landowner who innocently opened his land to allow hunting could pay a huge penalty for granting that permission.

One doesn’t have to use much imagination to speculate how this news is reverberating throughout regions in Pennsylvania.

“We’re watching it very closely,” said game commission press secretary Jerry Feaser. “But, it’s not just hunting that is at risk here. It is all forms of outdoor recreation. You have the potential for landowners overreacting and closing land to all forms of outdoor recreation.”

Hunters across the country have reason to take notice of this particular court case.   Even though the legal precedent it sets will probably not have a real impact in the areas where you likely hunt (unless you live in Pennsylvania), it’s news like this that makes landowners across the country quite nervous.   And rightly so.   The argument used to even convince the jury that the landowner was culpable could scare even a sensible, realistic-thinking landowner into a mode of acting overly cautious.

The Plaintiffs’ Attorney argued that the landowner “disregarded his neighbors' safety by letting people hunt on his property.”

Apparently the landowner’s neighbors had posted their land and not allowed hunting.   Yet when the “negligent” landowner did not follow suit he helped to create the unfortunate situation by virtue of letting someone go hunting on his land.

I believe that what this shows is yet another form of attack on our sportsman’s rights.   Granted, the victim is probably due her compensation in this case…but let’s be realistic, the real culprit who caused the accident was not the landowner.   The only real reason the landowner was even brought into the case as a defendant was because when you sue someone you must go where the money is.   I find it damn hard to believe that the plaintiffs’ attorneys were not fully aware of the shooter’s lack of financial wherewithall before filing the lawsuit.   Yet they proceeded with the case because they knew the landowner, if found even the slightest bit negligent, could end up being the biggest loser.

As sportsmen we have every incentive to fight for stronger laws that protect and limit the type of liability a landowner could sustain.   On the surface this case just doesn’t seem quite right—albeit I only have just a few of the facts.   Still, when landowners become wary of who is on their land and refuse access just to minimize their risk…well then, we all lose.

As a landowner myself, I know I have a duty to carefully screen who I allow access to my land for hunting and fishing.   Yet, once that threshold of comfort is reached, is it right that I or any other landowner for that matter, be held liable for some hunter’s actions?   If the hunter was prone to act risky does the landowner have an absolute duty to determine that prior to granting permission?

Even worse yet…if the lands surrounding my farm restrict hunting should my farm be held to a higher standard because I opened it up to a bunch of recreationalists who happened to make a terrible mistake in judgment on some given day?   Maybe there’s not a legal precedent being established here for most of us…but there certainly could be a landowner access precedent that takes root from these kind of news reports and fosters a backlash even beyond Pennsylvania against allowing hunting on one’s land.

Let’s face it, about a dozen years ago I stood outside my garage talking to another hunter during deer season and had a slug travel only 10 feet or so above our heads.   We were lucky…but we were also quite mad about the incident.   For the next hour I chased down the hunter in an adjacent woods and read them the “riot act” pertaining to their carelessness.   Even had that slug caused property damage or some kind of injury to either of us…I don’t think the thought would have entered my mind to blame the landowner and try to hold him financially responsible.   It was the hunter who was the actor in the event that occurred.

When the day finally comes that landowners are worried to allow hunting on their land it will be the death-grip to end our beloved sport.   Sportsmen have a vested interest in seeing landowners in general treated respectfully and responsibly.   Even if one landowner loses, as might be the case someday soon out in Pennsylvania, the impact might be felt far beyond that state’s borders as landowners grow more cautious and less permissive to the types of activities that take place on their lands.   We simply cannot allow that to happen.

© 2006 Jim Braaten.  All Rights Reserved.  No Reproduction Without Prior Permission.

Here's One List You Don't Want To Make

The past three or four days have been interesting, to say the least.   On the final day of my most recent fishing trip I called home to learn that a storm inflicting damage on a portion of southern Minnesota indeed personally touched my life.   The damage was due to hail, roughly the size of a baseball, pummeling my farm and resulting in damage to all of the buildings and any vehicles that were left outside.

Of particular disappointment was to my house which loyal blog readers will know is new after last summer.   In fact, it wasn’t until last October when I finally moved into the new house after a long summer during 2005 of construction and related headaches.   Now, the house is totaled (on the outside) requiring a new roof, all new siding and gutters after only about 10 months since they were first put on.   Yea, kind of a bummer, if you don’t mind me saying so.

After last summer making one of the worst decisions in my life by hiring the wrong building contractor to complete my housing project, I vowed never again to make the mistake of failing to check out the business aptitude as well as the overall ability of a contractor to treat me fair and to complete the job right.   Indeed, I’ve learned a lesson the hard way that the decisions you make in choosing a building contractor are results that you must live with for many years — literally!

Not being one to dwell on those past mistakes, I thought this time around I am going to more thoroughly check out any skilled labor that I might ultimately choose to work on my now new house project.   The storm, you might say, has given me another chance to this time make the right choices in finding the ideal people to best serve my housing interests.   So you begin by talking to friends and asking around…you know, everybody seems to have ideas on who you should use to get the job done.

So two days ago, on the recommendation of a friend, this contractor shows up looking to bid on my project and prove his worthiness.   I must admit I’m leery…even downright skeptical whether or not he’s the right choice.   Then we strike up a conversation about hunting.   Seems he’s a big hunter…loves to hunt.   In fact, he told me he could not wait to get home that day just to spend some time outside shooting the bow.   Slowly I’m warming up to the guy…figure he’s one of us.   Hell, I’d much rather do business with a sportsman who shares similar outdoor interests as I do.   I figure…somebody who connects in such a manner with me is bound to treat me fair as one would only expect from another outdoors brother.

Well…I was wrong.   Just when I was about to give the guy the benefit of the doubt I discovered a dark little secret about his past.   A secret that I must say absolutely killed the deal.   I typed his name and home-town into Google and this little secret practically jumped out at me…begging me to take heed.   You see, what I had found was this new prospective building contractor on a dirty list kept by several different state game agencies.   On this particular list from my home state of Minnesota I found the name of the contractor hoping to do work on my house.   That’s right, a big-game law violator who still has several more years of suspension on his hunting privileges.   In other words, in Minnesota, as well as in several cooperating states, this guy cannot legally hunt big game this season or for several more seasons to come.   His past actions and subsequent court conviction is right there in plain sight for the public to view.

Now quite honestly up until that point I did not know such a list even existed.   What a great tool.   Here I am doing a Google search (the poor man’s background check) on a name and address when I find the list of fish and game violators…and that’s how it should be.   Our fish and game law violators who have lost their privileges because of their flagrant actions should be identified for public scrutiny.   When your name inauspiciously lands on such a list it should become fodder for folks attempting to decipher your character.

Needless to say this guy’s business card got promptly tossed in the waste can upon learning of his game conviction.   Quite frankly I didn’t need to research any further…if you hold yourself out to me as a sportsman and the records clearly show something different…all credibility is instantly gone.   Kaput!

But what still concerns me is this guy’s remark that he had to go home to practice with his bow.   Is he planning to hunt this fall?   Is he perhaps planning to illegally hunt in Minnesota or one of the other states that also recognizes his suspended big game license?   Suddenly my interest in the contractor rests more on his upcoming hunting adventures rather than any work he might be expecting to do on my house.

Certainly he doesn’t know I’ve seen his name on the game violator list.   He doesn’t realize his chances to do any work for me have all but disappeared thanks to his apparent poor behavior afield.   He also doesn’t know I will do whatever is necessary to cooperate with his local conservation officer should I learn of any future illegal plans from our next conversation.

Yup, I’ve learned that choosing the wrong construction contractor can be a big headache if the necessary care isn’t used to filter out the “bad eggs” found throughout the profession.   Conversely, it might soon become a learning lesson for one particular contractor who has a demonstrated history of past game violations if it turns out he didn’t use greater care in choosing the right potential customer.   Truth is…if a person holds themselves out to me as a sportsman then their actions better reinforce the words…or this time they just might end up being the ones to pay the consequences.

© 2006 Jim Braaten.  All Rights Reserved.  No Reproduction Without Prior Permission.

What The Hell Was He Thinking?

The behavior exhibited by some people never ceases to amaze me.   Yet often this same behavior has a tendency to down-right disgust me.   Especially because to the general public this sort of negative press is often attributed to being a “hunter” and the sport of hunting, not to some criminal act totally separate from our beloved traditions.   Again, we’re all given a black-eye because one of our own falls miserably short when it comes to using good judgment and discretion in their behavior.

I’m talking about the recent indictment of country music artist Troy Gentry.   Allegedly he is accused of purchasing a tame black bear that federal officials are claiming he shot with a bow inside an enclosed pen.   Supposedly he paid $4,650 for a bear known as “Cubby” to use while he taped a mock wild black bear kill here in Minnesota back in fall 2004.   I’m reading that the bear’s death was videotaped and subsequently edited to make it look like he killed it in a “fair chase” hunting situation.   Supposedly he even registered the kill with the MN DNR as if it were wild in an effort to further this shameful ruse.

If convicted the country singer, as well as the game farm owner of the bear, could face stiff federal charges.   Gentry on conspiracy to falsely label an animal and the game farm operator on separate charges.   In fact, both could face fines up to $20,000 plus a maximum of 5 years in prison for their respective actions in this little stunt.

Now if I were the judge and they were found guilty…I would be inclined to give them both the maximum penalty because they obviously both are too damn dumb to know how to sensibly act.   I doubt either one of them understood the gravity of what they were doing.

Problem is common sense does not always play a big role in directing the lives of some people.   Pure greed and the intense desire to be seen as a success among peers will drive men that should know much better to do some really stupid acts.   First, take the owner of the bear…if you have a pet animal that presumably you are licensed to keep, how can you sell a pet when you must know the nefarious fate it will eventually have?   I guess money has power and intoxicates the sensibilities…how else do you excuse it?   Now take the country singer who has even more at stake — namely his reputation.   Why would he even take the risk of possibly being publicly exposed as a complete fraud?   If convicted he should forever live with the fact the public will see he is a real phony…stripped of any past sportsman accomplishments because now they would all be suspect.   Hell, in my book he could have been caught with a street hooker and eventually he might have walked away from that incident salvaging some of his reputation.   But not now, not if he is convicted of this violation.   Never again should the title of sportsman be in any way associated with his name.

And folks that’s how it ought to be.   If the details turn out to be true then apparently Mr. Gentry was under an extreme amount of pressure for the public to see him succeed as a hunter.   In the end, all he likely proved was the fact he is a moron lacking a conscience.   The sporting community should stand up and ostracize folks like this to never allow them back into our circles.   Much like a convicted sex offender has lost all credibility and trustworthiness around kids…is it really much different for someone who purports to be a hunter and sportsman when their behavior has been proven to stoop this low?   Seriously, criminals (which is a better term than “hunter” in this case) like this should not be allowed ever again to hold a hunting license…anywhere…period…end of story.

Of course, the likes of defendants such as Gentry will probably claim they were “framed” and the alleged events didn’t happen at all like what is being reported.   Yet, I really don’t feel sorry for him.   Fact is, he had a video camera rolling that probably served as the biggest piece of evidence against him.   I don’t know that for certain, but it’s just a strong hunch I have.   Sometimes when the tape is rolling people will do strange and outrageous things for the camera.   Of course, it’s one thing to tape events of a hunt as they actually happened, yet another thing to turn it into a Hollywood production by fabricating all the important details.

Personally, I’m not into country music so I wouldn’t be very inclined to listen to this poor excuse for a so-called sportsman/singer anyway.   But if I did enjoy that genre of music I would now be very inclined to be voting with my pocketbook and never purchase any of his music again.   Besides, why patronize an artist who federal officials are attempting to prove makes poor decisions on spending his money anyway?

© 2006 Jim Braaten.  All Rights Reserved.   No Reproduction without Prior Permission.

Penn & Teller Shoot Down The Gun Control Myth

If you read my blog last month you’ll know that Penn & Teller do a wonderful “tell-it-like-it-is” program called Bullshit! featured on cable TV’s SHOWTIME Station.   Last month they took on PETA.   This month the dynamic duo is back at it once again with another provocative video piece this time taking on the gun control fanatics.

No matter how you feel about the issue of guns and how they should be regulated, this highly-emotionally charged issue is not going away anytime soon.   It is so refreshing to see a pair of big name entertainers sticking their necks out to voice their opinion as being pro-gun.   Granted, almost the entire 28 minutes of this show is spent shooting holes in the argument that guns should be much more highly regulated.   And of course, only Penn & Teller can accomplish it in such an entertaining fashion.

Take a look at the video by linking HERE.

Be forewarned—the video is nearly a half hour long, will play best if you have a high-speed Internet connection, and does contain some rough language.   Aside from that, it’s well worth a look.

© 2006 Jim Braaten.  All Rights Reserved.   No Reproduction without Prior Permission.

Be Careful You're Not Stepping Into Trouble

I think most of us would agree there is no room in the sporting world for folks mixing drugs with carrying guns.   It’s a bad combination no matter how you look at it.   But how aware are you of possibly walking up on a meth lab the next time you take to the woods?   Worse yet, would you even recognize the potential signs and dangers associated with such an illegal operation?

Fact is, the production of methamphetamine is a growing law enforcement concern nationwide.   Don’t make the mistake of thinking that it couldn’t or isn’t being produced where you live and hunt.   Chances are you would be terribly wrong and and being ignorant of this insidious drug crisis could mean some dire consequences for your health and well-being.

Having worked in the emergency medical field for several years I do have some first-hand knowledge of the prevalence of these drugs.   I also have worked closely with law enforcement officials who must deal with the problems created by these substances on almost a daily basis.   The problem is real…and it behooves ALL sportsmen to have at the very least a fundamental understanding of the dangers and the threat.

Just last Thursday I was driving home from a trip to my local Cabela’s when I decided to go on some back roads that are not frequently traveled.   As I was driving I glanced way up in the distance and I saw a glint of flashing emergency lights.   My first impression was…oh great!   I suppose there’s been an accident and I can’t get through now on the roadway.   As I approached I could see the commotion was not confined to the road…rather, it was at a farmhouse near the road that was encircled with yellow crime scene tape.   Immediately I concluded this can’t be good…I wonder if there possibly has been a murder or something?

As I slowly inched past the area around what I first thought was a rescue truck parked on the road…I glanced up and noticed this truck said Bloomington Bomb Squad.   YIKES!!!   What the hell was I doing anywhere close to a scene that would involve a bomb squad??!!   I quickly accelerated past the area wondering later if the law officers might have wondered why my truck sped from the area.

Actually, that bomb squad truck answered my questions…there likely was no murder at this house.   Nope, it was the scene of a drug bust that involved a methamphetamine lab.   You see, the chemicals and the process for “cooking” or reducing down the drug is so dangerous that even the sheriff’s department relies on professionals experienced with deadly explosives.   Consider this…what would happen if you and your hunting partners entered a woodlot and unknowingly walked into such an operation?   Fact is, a meth lab can exist virtually anywhere and everywhere.   They don’t have to be confined to a home or a building…and often times these labs are found in a remote wooded area where the criminals who have set up the site may also have “booby-trapped” the area to cause harm to any intruder.

So yes, if you want to consider yourself a savvy sportsman who is aware and on the look-out for dangers…you now must be observant for the tell-tale signs of meth production.   Here’s a synopsis of what danger signs to watch for when taking to the woods:

Used as designed, these household products are generally safe.  Mixed together, they can become explosive and/or give off toxic fumes.

Chemicals

• Acetone
• Alcohol (isopropyl or rubbing)
• Common cold pills containing ephedrine or pseudoephedrine
• Drain cleaner (sulfuric acid)
• Engine starter (ether)
• Iodine
• Heet/gasoline additives (methanol/alcohol)
• Lithium batteries
• Matches (red phosphorous)
• Muriatic acid
• Anhydrous ammonia
• Red Devil lye
• Salt (table or rock)
• Sodium metal
• Trichloroethane (gun cleaning solvent)
• Toluene

Equipment

• Aluminum foil
• Blender
• Bottles
• Cheesecloth
• Coffee filters
• Funnels
• Gas can
• Hot plate
• Jugs
• Paper towels
• Propane tank/thermos
• Pyrex dishes
• Rubber gloves/tubing
• Strainer
• Tape/clamps
• Thermometer

Also keep in mind that the people who manufacture these drugs also have a big investment in the operation.   These are folks who have proven they would risk their lives to either continue their habit and/or sell these highly addictive drugs.   Don’t lose sight of the fact that methamphetamine is one nasty drug that will often kill the serious user within five years.   These folks will act irrational and truthfully have little to lose in life.   If an unwitting sportsman happens to find themselves in the wrong place at the wrong time the trouble could escalate quickly.

If you suspect you have seen signs of a potential meth lab…get out of the area quickly!!   Don’t touch anything as it could explode.   And above all…carefully retrace your steps realizing that the area could be rigged to cause you harm.   Finally, immediately call local law enforcement officials or the conservation officer for the area to disclose your concern.   The best way to put these operations out of business is for law officers to deal with the dangers and the criminals.

Personally, I can’t emphasize enough that sportsmen need to understand that methamphetamine is not your ordinary recreational drug…unlike marijuana or even cocaine.   Meth kills, ruins families…and can quickly ruin your day, too, if you don’t accept the fact it can be found anywhere in your travels.   Last Thursday I was shocked to see the sights at that farmstead…especially since I’ve driven by the house dozens of times in recent months.   It did, however, reinforce in my mind that we live in a different world where dangers are ever-present and need to be better understood by all of us.

© 2006 Jim Braaten.  All Rights Reserved.   No Reproduction without Prior Permission.

Injured Deer Gets Ride From Good Samaritan

Here’s the deal…let’s assume you are driving home early some morning…oh, about 3am or so, and suddenly out of nowhere a deer bolts in front of your vehicle and you hit it.   Damn!   For most of us our first concern is likely the extent of damage done done to the vehicle.   Of course, as compassionate adults, if the deer is still alive you most certainly will have some concern for the critter who happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, at least as far as you are concerned.

But that’s not what happened a few days ago near Foley, Minnesota.   No, instead April Weiser hit a deer with her car and that’s when the compassionate nature of this veterinary technician took over.   Rather than let the animal die in the ditch, she hoisted its 90–pound body into the back seat of her auto and sped off for help.   She drove 80 miles with a roommate, Tara Miller, to the Twin Cities to take the injured deer to the Wildlife Rehababilitation Center in Roseville.   Even though the report did not state for certain, it appears likely that by now the extent of the deer’s injuries would require the deer to be euthanized.

Okay, before we go on with this story let’s examine it from a sportsman’s perspective.   In Minnesota, as well as in many other states I suspect, it is illegal to terminate the life of an injured deer unless you are licensed and it is during deer hunting season.   That means that if you hit a deer with your truck and it is still in the ditch kicking…you had best call for a law enforcement officer to handle the matter.   Even if you have the capability to end the deer’s life and suffering…you could be ticketed for taking such action.   In fact, it is my understanding that more than likely if a conservation officer gets involved you will be ticketed if those actions were taken without law enforcement involvement.

Of course, Ms Weiser wasn’t looking to do the logical thing…instead, her do-good mentality kicked in and she acted in the “compassionate” way.   She was labeled by the wildlife officer as a “good Samaritan” despite the fact her response actually broke Minnesota law.

‘Technically, the women broke the law by transporting a wild animal without permission of the Department of Natural Resources or other law enforcement.

But neither Weiser nor Miller knew that, and nobody told them otherwise.

A DNR officer said Thursday the women won't be charged.

"They are good Samaritans, they did a good thing," said Major Jeff Thielen of the DNR. "But it's illegal to move 'em. And it's better to leave 'em. It's just probably safer and better."’

Hmm…   Now I find this quite interesting.   What these ladies did was clearly a violation of Minnesota law…yet, because they were “good Samaritans” no charges will be filed.   And why?   Because NOBODY TOLD THEM OTHERWISE.   They were ignorant of the law that required them NOT to transport wildlife without permission.   They did a good and thing…went to extremes in doing what they thought was right…so we [DNR] will look the other way this time and publicize it so everybody learns from their mistaken judgment.

Quite frankly I’m troubled by this story on many levels.   First is the fact that the Minnesota DNR won’t charge these ladies for their actions.   Sportsmen have been told repeatedly that we must be thoroughly familiar with the law because ignorance is no excuse.   So, is the DNR holding a hunting licensed-carrying sportsman to a higher standard than an naive person motivated merely by good intentions?   Furthermore, what makes her actions of doing what she thinks is best any different than if a sportsman pulled a gun out of the trunk and quickly ended the deer’s misery?   Both actions are clearly wrong and a violation of law…but I suspect that the DNR would handle the two scenarios much differently.

I’m disappointed with officials with the Minnesota DNR for making any distinctions in their interpretation.   Quite honestly, a wildlife officer is expected to uphold the law (or the administrative rule) the very way it appears on the books.   The legislature makes the laws…law enforcement carries out the enforcement activities of those laws…and the courts make any interpretations of whether it is appropriate or not.   When wildlife officers start making actions that can cause the public to question the fairness in which they carry out their responsibilities…then I believe they are venturing down a very slippery slope, so to speak.

On a different level, perhaps a better example would have been made if charges were filed for the violation.   Let’s face it, the ridiculousness of having an injured deer in the back seat of a car traveling down the highway is totally insane.   What if that deer suddenly had a burst of energy and went berserk thrashing around while these ladies were traveling down the highway to the Twin Cities?   It certainly could have happened…and those actions then could have jeopardized lives beyond the deer’s alone if an accident would have resulted.

When people violate the law…irrespective of whether their intentions were good or bad…they need to answer to their actions if they were not appropriate.   The Minnesota DNR has now set precedent by forgiving the stunt of a pair of do-gooders who were merely ignorant of the law.   In the process, they have also all but proven to us sportsmen that if we went to such extremes involved with a similar scenario…the same blind eye would likely not be turned.   Personally, I’m disappointed because I would have expected better decisions from this agency.

© 2006 Jim Braaten.  All Rights Reserved.   No Reproduction without Prior Permission.

Publicly Promoting Your Outdoor Passion

A few days ago I got one of those cutesy e-mails from a friend with all sorts of funny pictures attached.   You’ve heard the old statement, “a picture is worth a thousand words.”   In this case two of the pictures spoke quite loudly to me as they were pictures of mailboxes obviously used by sportsmen.   I have no idea who took the pictures or where the mailboxes are located, but I figured they were worth passing along for a few smiles.

When it comes to promoting our passions I suppose there are two schools of thought.   On one hand there is they guy or gal who leaves no doubt about the fact they enjoy the outdoors.   It might be a mailbox (such as the ones shown) very conspicuous at the end of the driveway or it can be a more subtle indication elsewhere in the yard – such as an archery target, a camouflaged four-wheeler, a boat, or some other “tool of the trade” for the sportsmen.

On the other hand there is quite an opposite school of thought.   This sportsman may be very proud of his outdoor passion, but they won’t put it on public display.   Why?   Some folks believe that to promote you’re a sportsman is to only invite trouble in the form of thievery.   I know of a few sportsmen who are so paranoid (?) or should I call it careful that they will actually cut the mailing labels off their hunting and fishing magazines before they go to the recycler.   To these folks parking a boat in the front yard is akin to showing your hand in a poker game.   It’s nobody else’s business as to what other valuable equipment might be hidden inside the home or the garage.

For several years I, too, have struggled with how I hold myself open to the public.   Even though I am very proud of my sportsman heritage and want to show off this pride…I don’t want to be foolhardy, either, and dangle some carrots in front of would-be thieves.   My guns, my fishing equipment, everything I own that is used to enjoy the outdoors has some very personal value to me…or else I wouldn’t keep it.

I’ve tried to strike a balance between letting the public know I am a sportsman and trying to keep some of my toys secure and hidden.   Obviously when you blog about the outdoors it is not much different than having a mailbox at the end of your driveway in the shape of a pistol.   Your privacy is a bit more open to the public.

Yet, as sportsmen we owe it to ourselves to keep our equipment secure – not only for security reasons but also for safety sake.   One of the best things you can do is invite a police officer over to your home for an evaluation.   Maybe it’s a friend whose off-duty or maybe you have contacted your local sheriff’s office for a home crime prevention inspection.   You’d be amazed at some of the little things you can do to foil a burglar.   These professionals know how thieves work and think…and if you property is important to you they can lend some great suggestions to lessen your chance of being so vulnerable.

There’s really no reason that as sportsmen we need to be so secretive about our passions.   Put them on public display in some fashion and celebrate them.   Whether you hunt, fish or camp there’s a certain pride that goes along with pursuing those pastimes that should not be stifled because of some potential fear.   I want people to know that a sportsman lives at my residence; I just don’t want to do it foolishly so some other guy thinks he might enjoy using my equipment or outdoor toys more then me.

© 2005 Jim Braaten.  All Rights Reserved.   No Reproduction without Prior Permission.

Pulling The Trigger Via The Internet

Imagine sitting in the comforts of your den, in your underwear, a fresh-brewed cup of coffee on your computer desk, a nice cozy office chair…and hunting via the Internet.   Yes, I said hunting with a real gun participating in the blood sports as if you were out in the briars and brambles, sort of, without really being there.   Indeed, we have reached the computer age in more ways than many folks want to imagine.

What is causing this new controversy is a website called Live-Shot.com.   Here you can join as a member, shoot a variety of guns by remote control (using your computer), and basically have fun with the shooting sports without fear of recoil, flinching or the host of other maladies that inflict a shooter when holding a firearm for real.

But that’s not exactly what has many folks up in arms.   It’s the fact that on this web site aside from just plinking you can also hunt feral hogs for a price.   That’s right, you sit at your computer much like waiting in a tree stand to waylay the prey as it wanders by.   The difference is you are doing the killing hundreds, perhaps even thousands of miles away from the actual killing scene.

Personally, I am not offended by the concept of remote controlled hunting as much as it seems to bother some folks.   Take, for instance, a disabled person who has had a life-long dream of being able to hunt.   If this person’s a quadriplegic, it would likely not have been possible for this would-be hunter to participate in any other way.   Now a hunter with great disabilities can experience the same thrill, albeit in a much sanitized way, that I as a sportsman feel out on the deer stand.

Are there definite problems with remote controlled hunting?   Absolutely.   First and foremost is the issue of state law.   Hunting in a state where you might need to be licensed to enjoy such activities…but when you aren’t physically in the state…well, it’s kind of hard to enforce the issue.   How can you begin to prosecute a hunter who might be literally hunting a world away?

And sure, there’s also the issue of wanton waste.   Sportsmen do not as a rule just go around killing, even such critters as feral hogs are used for meat.   But if you are in another country hunting on the Internet are you realistically having the meat processed and sent to you?   Probably not.

My take on remote hunting is that it will never become a popular fad.   Sure, people will hear about it in the news and be fascinated about the prospect of shooting a gun by remote control…but it will never gain widespread popularity.   Even in this age of kids being more excited by their computers and electronic games as they are to the wonders of nature…maybe hunting remotely is yet another 21st Century way to introduce youngsters and others to the sport of hunting.   Let’s face it…if a person who has never hunted has fun shooting and bagging game on the Internet…they are bound to have the urge to experience it in person.   At least one would think so.

As many of the state legislatures see bills frantically introduced to control or ban remote hunting, I have to wonder how will it be next that computers end of effecting our lives next.   When you can potentially deer hunt using a laptop computer laying in bed on a cold, snowy morning…it just goes to show you how computers have the potential to change and be applied to just about any aspect of our lives…even in the outdoors!

Good or bad, you will hear lots more about the issue of remote hunting in the months to come.   My guess is the activity will be shunned wholeheartedly by folks who pride themselves as traditionalists and think technology has gone way too far this time.   Maybe so, but I happen to believe with some proper controls and regulations in place, and once the hysteria of the whole notion of remote hunting has died down…that it could potentially have more positive effects than negative to our sport.

Maybe it isn’t right for you or for me…but let’s not forget the folks who might have some different circumstances going on in their lives…whether it be a disability or some other difficult challenge.   These people deserve the right just like you and me to experience the thrills and awe of hunting even if the method of doing so seems to be a total insult to those of us who pay the price with cold fingers and wet toes early in the morning.

© 2005 Jim Braaten.  All Rights Reserved.   No Reproduction without Prior Permission.

Should Minnesota Hunters Be Required To Wear Back Tags?

I’m beginning to hear rumblings that some people think Minnesota should go to a system requiring hunters to wear their license on the back.   This discussion is prompted by the much publicized shooting that occurred last weekend in Northern Wisconsin.   The thinking is by displaying the number it would give other hunters a mechanism to identify and report law violators.

It was reported last Sunday that the hunters who had encountered Vang (the alleged murderer) had taken note of his back tag number by writing it in the dirt (on the ATV, I believe).   When investigators finally arrived at the scene they found this number so they knew who the likely alleged shooter was.   If Wisconsin had not used a back tag system, there would have been no positive way to so quickly identify the alleged participants in this massacre.

There are many states besides Wisconsin that do require hunting license back tags.   A few of these states would include Pennsylvania, Delaware, New York, Maine, as well as others.   Primarily the historic reason for the tags was not for identification, but to curb the problem of hunters simply hunting without a license.   In fact, many of these states actually used a button that would be worn on the outside of a person’s hunting clothing.   As licenses evolved, so too has the way states have required hunters to display them.   Today, most of the states that require the display of the license ask for hunters to affix it to the area between the shoulder blades worn on the outer most garment of clothing on the back.

So is it time Minnesota goes to such a system for its licensing?   Truthfully I have mixed feelings on this issue.   As a landowner who has encountered trespassers over the years it has always been my frustration how to properly identify the law violators.   Because I am not a law enforcement official, do I really have the authority to require identification in the form of a driver’s license?   I’m guessing that person has no obligation or duty to me to hand over his/her license to prove identity.   Furthermore, it gets into a very gray area if I can even take any action to detain this person on my property waiting for law enforcement to arrive.   Certainly by attempting such action could quickly escalate the situation.

So yes, indeed, if hunters were required to wear a back tag it would allow positive identification with even the most casual of contact.   The problem is trespassing doesn’t always occur just during hunting season.   Sometimes it is during the pre-season for scouting.   Maybe for the system to really work a person would be required to display this tag whenever he is out participating in activities related to hunting (when in-season or off-season).

Again, let’s not lose sight of the fact that the real reason that most of the states have this system is for the game wardens and conservation officers to do a quick license check.   In most cases these are states that have lots of hunters and taking the time to have hunters remove a license from a wallet is simply not practical.   The officers can move on quickly to check other hunters after doing a quick back check.   Still, I have not heard Minnesota Conservation Officers urging a big groundswell to go to this system…so I must assume wearing back tags is not a big enforcement issue here in Minnesota.

Oddly enough the people who want to see us move to this system are hunters themselves.   One would think that hunters would be the last group that would want to require such actions be taken.   Let’s face it, when you pin a license on your back it can get easily snagged and torn off while walking through brushy areas.   Then what do you do?   Go spend another $5 to purchase a replacement tag?   Is it necessary to suspend your hunting activities until you drive to town and find an ELS license vendor who can print one off for you?   To me this seems like the potential for much more hassle than benefit.

I’ll admit I have never hunted in a state that required back tags as part of the legal requirement.   At this point in time it would take more convincing for me to be an advocate of this change here in Minnesota.   It’s quite obvious that wearing such tags did not serve as deterrent to trespassing in Wisconsin last weekend…and I doubt it would have little effect here in Minnesota, as well.   Instead, let’s put some greater teeth into our current trespassing laws not only with monetary penalties, but perhaps with some form of community service component as punishment to those who are careless in their travels.

© 2004 Jim Braaten. All Rights Reserved.   No Reproduction without Prior Permission.

What We Know (And Expect) 3 Days After The Tragedy

By now some of the initial shock is beginning to wear off and the earnest search for answers begin.   Certainly at this point we may not know many of the facts about what went wrong in the Northern Wisconsin woods last Sunday, but we do know six hunters will not be sharing Thanksgiving with their families tomorrow.   As we continue to search for the WHY…let’s take a moment to review what we do know to be true so far about this unfortunate tragedy, mixed in with a few predictions for the future:

The Act Was Senseless

No matter what was said or what actions were taken to remove the trespasser from the private property…the situation did not rise to a level where loss of life was a necessary outcome.   Killing another human being is an action “as a last resort” and it should not arise from the mere act of trespassing no matter how heated the situation may have become.

Vang Has A Documented History of Law Violations & Violence Toward Others

Police and DNR records show that Vang has had numerous contacts with law enforcement officials.   From over-harvest of crappies, to violence against his wife, the record appears to be clear that Vang has shown a certain propensity to act in a threatening manner and with disregard for proper lawful conduct.

Vang’s Demeanor After Arrest

Reports by the authorities have indicated that Vang was very calm and cooperative in the hours after arrest.   One would think that if he had acted in self-defense (having been fired upon first) this action would transfer into a more excited demeanor.   Instead, I sensed a certain calmness consistent with someone who knew their life was never being threatened.

Killing Was Execution Style

At one point one of the witnesses stated that when Vang found a victim still alive he stated something to the effect…oh, you’re not dead yet.   And shot the victim again in the back.   Others stated that Vang was actually chasing his victims before making the fatal shot.

Vang Did Not Seek Out The Authorities After The Shooting

Perhaps the biggest factor in my mind that negates a self-defense plea is the fact Vang was wearing full camouflage (by this time) and was not arrested for four hours afterwards.   A reasonable person would have attempted to notify the authorities and not acted in a manner to evade capture.

Eventually Vang Will Be Made Out To Be The Real Victim

As much as I hate to say it, the media and the Hmong community will twist the events of this horrific day and attempt to turn Vang into the real victim.   Even though six people lay dead, Vang will in time become the poster child, of sorts, for a community that feels it is disadvantaged and often threatened by the majority in this new land.   In time, I predict attitudes will shift to show Vang was a folk hero to his people because he lashed out to defend his honor.   This sort of thing has happened before with another much publicized killing that occurred over 20 years ago (read about that story here).

Conflicts Between Hmong and Whites Over Hunting Is Nothing New

The Hmong population seems to view hunting much differently as most of the rest of the sporting population.   For many Hmong, hunting is more of a subsistence hunting where game taken for the table is of paramount importance.   I remember once riding with a conservation officer in Minnesota over by Red Wing.   We stopped to check some Hmong hunters who had shot common songbirds, such a robins, for food.   I believe a successful hunt for them is bringing food back home for the family...no matter in what form it may be.   In contrast, many of us measure hunting success as spending quality social time with family and friends only to use hunting as the excuse for the get-together.   Attitudinal differences are bound to make hunting clashes between social groups somewhat inevitable.

More Bullets Likely Would Have Meant More Dead

It’s apparent that Vang only stopped the killing after he exhausted his supply of 20 rounds of ammunition.   No doubt had he carried more ammunition there likely would be more people dead or injured at the end of this tragic day.

This Event Is Not Positive For The Image of All Sportsmen

The media has had a field day trying to paint a negative picture about hunters fighting over a tree stand.   But this is not about hunting, per se.   This incident is about controlling tempers and acting with rational behavior during a disagreement.   Nevertheless, hunting will be blemished by this incident and the anti-gunners will only point to the fact that the killer carried an “assault weapon” even though we know that definitionally this is not accurate.   Had the killer used a typical rifle with superior ballistics carried by most deer hunters it may have left fewer survivors in the aftermath, but the non-hunting public will never understand this fact.

No doubt about it this horrific story will see many more blog entries in the days, weeks and months to come.   I truly believe that the incident that happened in Wisconsin’s woods last Sunday will have long-lasting and interesting consequences, many of which we cannot possibly understand at this point.   My sincere hope is that some good comes out from this tragedy, perhaps in the form of greater cultural awareness.   The more we learn and the more we discover what went wrong will only serve to better understand how tragedies such as this can be prevented in the future.

© 2004 Jim Braaten. All Rights Reserved.   No Reproduction without Prior Permission.