Published November 29, 2011, 09:37 AM
Northland woman accused of illegally shooting two trophy bucks
The two deer had been seen frequently this fall at a local golf course. The woman allegedly used bait to draw them to her stand, a practice which is illegal.By: Sam Cook, Duluth News Tribune, DL-Online
Northland woman accused of illegally shooting two trophy bucks
The two deer had been seen frequently this fall at a local golf course. The woman allegedly used bait to draw them to her stand, a practice which is illegal.
By: Sam Cook, Duluth News Tribune, DL-Online
A Two Harbors woman has been charged with taking two deer while hunting over bait and hunting without a valid license.
The deer, both mature bucks with large antlers, had been seen frequently this fall near Lakeview National Golf Course in Two Harbors by city residents and hunters, a Department of Natural Resources conservation officer said.
Valery Vawn Wright, 49, of Two Harbors is charged in state district court in Lake County with misdemeanors for hunting deer over a baited area on Nov. 5 and Nov. 12 during Minnesota’s firearms deer season. She also is charged with misdemeanors for hunting without a valid deer license and for having deer over her limit.
She’s charged with gross misdemeanors for transporting an illegally taken animal and for taking or possessing wild animals with a restitution value of more than $1,000.
“The charges on the first deer are being disputed,” Wright said in a telephone interview Monday. “I’m talking to a lawyer about this. I had no knowledge that everything (bait) had to be raked up.”
According to the complaint, the charges stem from incidents on Nov. 5 and Nov. 12, when Wright was allegedly hunting deer with a firearm just outside of Two Harbors. Nov. 5 was opening day of Minnesota’s firearms deer season.
Department of Natural Resources conservation officers Dan Thomasen and Matt Miller responded Nov. 12 when a call came to the Lake County Sheriff’s office about someone possibly shooting within city limits in the area of the golf course, according to the complaint
They followed a path into the woods and found Wright, wearing camouflage clothing, hunting with a firearm on property just outside the city, according to the complaint. Officer Miller found carrots scattered on the ground along the path approximately 20 yards in front of the stand, the complaint said. A small amount of grain also was visible in the grass, according to the complaint.
Wright told the officers that she had just shot a “nice buck,” according to the complaint. The buck she shot was about 5 to 10 yards away from the carrots and grain, the complaint stated.
Minnesota law prohibits deer hunters from using bait while hunting.
Wright admitted she was the one who shot the buck that morning, and that she had brought the carrots with her and dumped them on the ground in front of her deer stand, the complaint alleges. She also admitted coming to the same clearing 11 or 12 days before deer season “with a bag of No. 14 horse feed, a mix of grains and minerals, and spread it all over the area in order to ‘attract deer,’ ” the complaint stated.
“Officer Miller spotted a smear of dried blood in the grass,” the complaint alleges. “The defendant stated that the blood was from dragging out the first buck she had shot on Nov. 5.”
Thomasen said that, although Wright possessed a firearms hunting license, she had used it Nov. 5 to tag her first buck. When she shot the second buck on Nov. 12, she could have done so legally only if she had been party hunting and another member of her party was in the field with her at the time. That situation also resulted in the misdemeanor over-limit charge, Thomasen said.
The two bucks had been frequently observed in the area near the golf course, Thomasen said.
“With the city bow hunt in Two Harbors, there’s been a lot of interest in trying to harvest those deer,” he said. “Everyone was eyeing those bucks.”
A photo of a woman with a large buck has been posted to www.northlandoutdoors.com) with a caption that reads: “Val Wright of Two Harbors shot this 10 point buck on opening day south of Silver Bay that dressed out at 199 pounds.”
Under Minnesota law, deer are assigned a restitution value of $500. Deer with large antlers are assigned higher restitution value.
The buck allegedly taken by Wright on Nov. 12 had an antler measurement of 138 based on the Boone and Crockett scoring system, according to the complaint. That put its restitution value at $1,000. Together, the restitution value of the two deer that Wright allegedly shot is $1,500, resulting in the gross misdemeanor/gross over limit charge, Thomasen said.
Wright is scheduled to appear in state district court in Lake County on Dec. 12. Maximum penalty for each gross misdemeanor charge is one year incarceration and/or a $3,000 fine. Maximum penalty for each misdemeanor charge is 90 days incarceration and/or a $1,000 fine.
Wright’s hunting rifle was confiscated, Thomasen said.
End of DL-online story.
Now then, why does any of this matter. Well, it matters because it's one of the examples of idiotz wit teh gunz doin' stupid shit.
But, but, but--I can already hear the apologists for gunzloonz cranking up the whambulance.
What's really crazy is that she will prolly get a bigger fine (and possibly some other sanctions) than someone who kills a PERSON while doing something stupid in the woods.
Obviously she broke the law in Minnesota rather or not she thought she had.
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure what "one of the examples of idiotz wit teh gunz doin' stupid shit." this is other than failing to read and understand the local regulations. It doesn't sound like she was intentionally poaching or trying to hide anything.
She apparently violated a hunting regulation, and if convicted, she'll pay. That's as should be. The system worked. Arre you just gloating, or is there more to this?
ReplyDeleteFor me there's more to it. Hunting is a sick activity. Sitting in a tree stand and shooting animals is OK, but putting bait out for them is not? Is that what I understood?
ReplyDeleteSick.
FatWhiteMan:
ReplyDeleteThe baiting and shooting of not one, but two, deer; the carelessness of not knowing releavant regulations and, after the fact, the unwillingness to simply stipulate to the facts indicate "stupid" to me.
Greg Camp:
Wow, you're not defending her, "until all of the facts are known"?
This was a deer, what if it had been a human? Would she be more of an idiot, then.
You were fine with the guy shooting his gun to discourage/dissuade a prowler (someone he actually knew, it appears). That gent thought he "knew" the rules--apparently the police disagree with him. Now, say this same mighty Nimrodette had been in that situation, having someone she perceived as posing a threat on her property (or near it) and she decided that Castle Doctrine allowed her to preemptively shoot that person? There's not a great deal of difference, in terms of FAIL, in not knowing hunting regs v not knowing "baggin da perp" regs. The problem is that shooting deer illegally is not quite as serious as shooting people, legally or otherwise.
I know that to you, the shooter is always justified when they perceive a threat. You're wrong.
Mikeb302000:
I had someone tell me last night that shooting a deer with a rifle is sick--bows, muzzleloaders and slugguns, though, are okay. I guess "sick" means very different things to people.
I got no beef with legit hunters; I do wonder about people who use game trail cameras and so forth to "browse" for their trophy, but as long as they follow the rules...
Things like gamecams do sorta give the lie to the "culling the herd" meme.
The speed limit is 70 in Michigan and 65 in Ohio. This is no different. Hunting deer over bait is legal in most states, not in others. It is your job to know the local laws and to obey them but failing to do so does not make you some sort of despicable criminal.
ReplyDelete"I had someone tell me last night that shooting a deer with a rifle is sick--bows, muzzleloaders and slugguns, though, are okay. I guess "sick" means very different things to people."
Demo,
No kidding. Some hunters are unbelievable in their prejudices. I have seen some ludicrous statements made when states consider changing hunting regulations. One example was the Penn. debate on allowing crossbows to be used during bow season. Some hunters actually claimed that crossbows were "modern" and the use of the bow was somehow more pure because it was the way that primitive man hunted. Some didn't appreciate my comments. I said that they were right. Crossbows are merely 600 years old and not as "pure" as their bows. Just imagine our ancestors 10's of thousands of years ago sitting around the fire the night before the hunt. Telling tales of past hunts while they stretch their steel cables, truing up their pullies and checking the springs on their mechanical activated broadheads.
FatWhiteMan:
ReplyDeleteNot knowing the speed limit is 65 and doing 70 is hardly the same thing as not knowing that it's not okay to shoot over bait. A cursory look at the chart on this page (http://www.skinnymoose.com/wanderings/2010/08/21/deer-vs-bear-the-pro-and-con-of-baiting/) shows that of MN and the five states that border it only one, WI, allows some limited deer baiting.
I have no beef with hunters who follow the rules; I do have a problem with hunters who break the rules.
FatWhiteMan:
ReplyDeleteI meant to add that the "bow, cross-bow" thing is not as cut and dried as even you portray it. Modern hunting bows are quite a bit different than the bows that were in use 100 years ago. Kevlar, carbon fiber and other materials, plus the relative ease of draw of modern bows and the lethality of the modern hunting arrow make them much easier to use and more deadly.
Jumping out of trees with a spear, now THAT would be some hunting. Course, if I was to jump out of a tree with a spear, I'd prolly forget to have the safety on and I'd get a pointy thingy in me.
Democommie,
ReplyDeleteWhy are you such a deliberate ass? A deer is a deer, and a human is a human. Hunting is different from self defense. If the woman in question had deliberately shot a human being, she'd be a sociopath, not a hunter. Do I have to explain that to you? Also, you should note that I said "apparently" and "if." I understand alleged vs. convicted.
When it comes to me, you know nothing.
"Modern hunting bows are quite a bit different than the bows that were in use 100 years ago. Kevlar, carbon fiber and other materials, plus the relative ease of draw of modern bows and the lethality of the modern hunting arrow make them much easier to use and more deadly."
ReplyDeleteThat was kind of my point. The modern bow is not what it was a decade ago, let alone 100 years or more. To regard it as more "pure" than a crossbow is silly. They are both capable, deadly hunting devices.
FatWhiteMan:
ReplyDeleteA rare apology is forthcoming from me. You are correct. There I said it, it hurt like hell, but I said it!
I was talking to a guy last night who sat out in the rain and snow for most of the day yesterday while the wily bucks avoided his fire lane. He hunts with both a bow and a rifle (he's got oneathem multi-barrel AR platforms that will take .223, .450 and another caliber--.308?). He thought the whole notion of "purity" was pretty silly. He's all about "clean kill". So am I. If you're going to hunt you should use best practice and be "safety first" on every shot.
I have no beef with legitimate hunters who follow all the rules and don't drink alcohol when they go hunting.
ReplyDeleteGet it?