|
|
10-07-2019, 05:46 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 98
|
|
I am having a bad experience with this ambiguous measurement system.
I shot my sheep on the second day of the season. Got home, booked my appointment to register, and prepared the skull in the way prescribed in the regulations.
During the registration they told me my sheep is 1.2 cm short. I looked at the jig and saw they had it set up to measure from the front edge of the eye socket. I argued that is not the eye but the eye-socket. They kept repeating that where they had it set was the eye. There was no convincing them otherwise. I asked to adjust the jig. I was able to set the jig touching base of horn and tip of horn while still being forward of the eyeball.
They brought me into the interview room and told me I wasn't being charged. They read me my rights and asked for a statement of events leading up to me shooting the sheep. I declined to give a statement without a lawyer being present. They confiscated the skull and meat. They told me they were keeping it whether I made a statement or not.
During this time they told me it is their policy not to charge within a certain range. I forget if it was 1.5 or 2.5 cm.
I told them I would like to appeal their decision. They replied that there is no appeals process. I then asked how do I get this in front of a judge. They replied it will not get in front of a judge because I'm not being charged. At this point I was beyond frustrated. They clearly know that their system is flawed and the regulations vague at best. Any judge would clearly see this and side with the hunter.
During my drive out to sheep hunting I called a CO to clarify the new regulations. She informed me the new jig system "makes it black or white whether the sheep is legal or not". Yet here I am with no sheep and no charges. It makes no sense to me that they can keep the sheep without charging me. In my opinion the sheep is either legal and I keep it or it is illegal and they keep it and I get charged.
Anyone out there dealt with something similar before? I want to fight to get the skull and meat back. A lawyer suggested that writing an appeal to the Minister of Wildlife would be my best bet. Others told me a civil suit would be in order. I haven't found one that will handle it on the civil side. They seem to handle criminal charges.
They are wasting this animal with their moving goal posts.
You can see here they have it set well forward of the eye.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/lggmyujqin...25956.jpg?dl=0
This is when I was allowed to adjust the jig.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/8d4jgxcr4b...11540.jpg?dl=0
Last edited by OldRussian; 10-07-2019 at 06:07 PM.
|
10-07-2019, 05:57 PM
|
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: calgary
Posts: 691
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldRussian
I am having a bad experience with this ambiguous measurement system.
I shot my sheep on the second day of the season. Got home, booked my appointment to register, and prepared the skull in the way prescribed in the regulations.
During the registration they told me my sheep is 1.2 cm short. I looked at the jig and saw they had it set up to measure from the front edge of the eye socket. I argued that is not the eye but the eye-socket. They kept repeating that where they had it set was the eye. There was no convincing them otherwise. I asked to adjust the jig. I was able to set the jig touching base of horn and tip of horn while still being forward of the eyeball.
They brought me into the interview room and told me I wasn't being charged. They read me my rights and asked for a statement of events leading up to me shooting the sheep. I declined to give a statement without a lawyer being present. They confiscated the skull and meat. They told me they were keeping it whether I made a statement or not.
During this time they told me it is their policy not to charge within a certain range. I forget if it was 1.5 or 2.5 cm.
I told them I would like to appeal their decision. They replied that there is no appeals process. I then asked how do I get this in front of a judge. They replied it will not get in front of a judge because I'm not being charged. At this point I was beyond frustrated. They clearly know that their system is flawed and the regulations vague at best. Any judge would clearly see this and side with the hunter.
During my drive out to sheep hunting I called a CO to clarify the new regulations. She informed me the new jig system "makes it black or white whether the sheep is legal or not". Yet here I am with no sheep and no charges. It makes no sense to me that they can keep the sheep without charging me. In my opinion the sheep is either legal and I keep it or it is illegal and they keep it and I get charged.
Anyone out there dealt with something similar before? I want to fight to get the skull and meat back. A lawyer suggested that writing an appeal to the Minister of Wildlife would be my best bet. Others told me a civil suit would be in order. I haven't found one that will handle it on the civil side. They seem to handle criminal charges.
I will try and upload pictures soon.
|
You will never see the sheep again. Charges no charges wether you dump $100 thousand into lawyers and take it to the federal courts. The government will always have more money and more lawyers and more time to waist than us poor hunters. Let this be a warning to all don’t shoot any ram unless it’s unmistakably legal, it’s a waist it’s unethical and it could cost you big $$ if you do get charged as they will never set presedence and return any animal once it is in the governments possession. Now that sheep was a waist of a life, meat,
|
10-07-2019, 06:06 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 98
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by raw outdoors
You will never see the sheep again. Charges no charges wether you dump $100 thousand into lawyers and take it to the federal courts. The government will always have more money and more lawyers and more time to waist than us poor hunters. Let this be a warning to all don’t shoot any ram unless it’s unmistakably legal, it’s a waist it’s unethical and it could cost you big $$ if you do get charged as they will never set presedence and return any animal once it is in the governments possession. Now that sheep was a waist of a life, meat,
|
I wouldn't have shot the sheep if i didn't think it was legal. How am I to know that they would measure well past the front of the eye? If the regulations stated what they are looking for hunters would have a chance. Instead it is several shades of grey.
|
10-07-2019, 06:30 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 3,713
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldRussian
I wouldn't have shot the sheep if i didn't think it was legal. How am I to know that they would measure well past the front of the eye? If the regulations stated what they are looking for hunters would have a chance. Instead it is several shades of grey.
|
Your second picture doesn’t prove it was legal or not legal. You can still see the horizontal plane of the jig along the front of the horn bases. Your photo is not in perfect profile. You have to take the picture from an upper angle so you can see that the horizontal plane of the jig along the bases is in a straight line with the vertical plane of the jig to the horn tip.
Do you have a photo from a higher angle. Otherwise you can’t say one way or the other from these photos.
__________________
There are some who can live without wild things, and some who cannot. Aldo Leopold
|
10-07-2019, 06:41 PM
|
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 15
|
|
New Sheep Jig and Registering
Old Russian. We had same thing happen this year on a similar ram. Our ram is legal according to the description in the regulations by a bit. Took one picture of it with a square on it as that’s how they used to check it. Would have taken lots more if I knew what was coming. We were not allowed to ever see it in the jig and had to take their word that it was 6mm short. Head, cape and meat were seized and a warning was given. No appeal process and we were absolutely not allowed to see it in the jig. I have a letter out to the minister with pics but don’t have a clue what will happen. The jig is not measuring the sheep the way the regulations describe how we are to judge the sheep or it is not being used properly. Would post pics but don’t know how. Very frustrating and takes what was a great experience to a real downer.
|
10-07-2019, 06:45 PM
|
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,848
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by bdub
Your second picture doesn’t prove it was legal or not legal. You can still see the horizontal plane of the jig along the front of the horn bases. Your photo is not in perfect profile. You have to take the picture from an upper angle so you can see that the horizontal plane of the jig along the bases is in a straight line with the vertical plane of the jig to the horn tip.
Do you have a photo from a higher angle. Otherwise you can’t say one way or the other from these photos.
|
Why do you need a higher angle!
|
10-07-2019, 06:49 PM
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Camrose
Posts: 45,099
|
|
If they determine that the ram is not legal, lay charges, let a judge decide if it is legal according to the regulations. Personally,l would not be shooting a ram that is within a few mm of being legal, just too risky for me to take the chance.
__________________
Only accurate guns are interesting.
|
10-07-2019, 06:53 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 3,713
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by ram crazy
Why do you need a higher angle!
|
I just explained it. You have to see both planes of the jig in perfect profile on the front of the horn base.
__________________
There are some who can live without wild things, and some who cannot. Aldo Leopold
|
10-07-2019, 07:07 PM
|
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,848
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by bdub
I just explained it. You have to see both planes of the jig in perfect profile on the front of the horn base.
|
I'd say it's pretty darn close to being in profile, looking at the bar where the horn tip would touch. You can see face of the bar ever so slightly, and that bar would be square to the bases. In the first pic the head could be turned just a bit to the left and the second pic it's really close to be parallel.
|
10-07-2019, 07:14 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 98
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by aarjay
Old Russian. We had same thing happen this year on a similar ram. Our ram is legal according to the description in the regulations by a bit. Took one picture of it with a square on it as that’s how they used to check it. Would have taken lots more if I knew what was coming. We were not allowed to ever see it in the jig and had to take their word that it was 6mm short. Head, cape and meat were seized and a warning was given. No appeal process and we were absolutely not allowed to see it in the jig. I have a letter out to the minister with pics but don’t have a clue what will happen. The jig is not measuring the sheep the way the regulations describe how we are to judge the sheep or it is not being used properly. Would post pics but don’t know how. Very frustrating and takes what was a great experience to a real downer.
|
I'm sorry to here you went through the same nightmare. Please let me know if you make any progress in fighting the decision.
The fact that they are measuring in a way separate from what the regulations state is the problem.
They aren't charging guys because they know they will get egg on their face if it gets in front of a judge.
Why mandate that we leave the eye in if they don't use the eye to measure? Why don't they tell us the standard they expect to be achieved? The regs are full of full colour atv and scope ads yet the sheep regs are a couple paragraphs and a cartoon.
Here is a picture of the CO holding the old measuring device on the ram. https://www.dropbox.com/s/88iqyhht5d...20843.jpg?dl=0
|
10-07-2019, 07:28 PM
|
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,848
|
|
I'd say that ram is legal by a 1/4", because when your out in the field judging a ram your using the eye and not the eye socket. Hard to see the socket with the hide on.
|
10-07-2019, 07:34 PM
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 15,827
|
|
None of those pictures are actually in profile.
__________________
“I love it when clients bring Berger bullets. It means I get to kill the bear.”
-Billy Molls
|
10-07-2019, 09:45 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 3,713
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldRussian
I'm sorry to here you went through the same nightmare. Please let me know if you make any progress in fighting the decision.
The fact that they are measuring in a way separate from what the regulations state is the problem.
They aren't charging guys because they know they will get egg on their face if it gets in front of a judge.
Why mandate that we leave the eye in if they don't use the eye to measure? Why don't they tell us the standard they expect to be achieved? The regs are full of full colour atv and scope ads yet the sheep regs are a couple paragraphs and a cartoon.
Here is a picture of the CO holding the old measuring device on the ram. https://www.dropbox.com/s/88iqyhht5d...20843.jpg?dl=0
|
This picture is not in perfect profile either. It does appear from that picture that it isn't legal imo. It looks like the line would pass into the dark portion of the eye if that photo was in perfect profile. Crappy deal OR.
__________________
There are some who can live without wild things, and some who cannot. Aldo Leopold
|
10-07-2019, 10:16 PM
|
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Calgary
Posts: 695
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldRussian
I am having a bad experience with this ambiguous measurement system.
I shot my sheep on the second day of the season. Got home, booked my appointment to register, and prepared the skull in the way prescribed in the regulations.
During the registration they told me my sheep is 1.2 cm short. I looked at the jig and saw they had it set up to measure from the front edge of the eye socket. I argued that is not the eye but the eye-socket. They kept repeating that where they had it set was the eye. There was no convincing them otherwise. I asked to adjust the jig. I was able to set the jig touching base of horn and tip of horn while still being forward of the eyeball.
They brought me into the interview room and told me I wasn't being charged. They read me my rights and asked for a statement of events leading up to me shooting the sheep. I declined to give a statement without a lawyer being present. They confiscated the skull and meat. They told me they were keeping it whether I made a statement or not.
During this time they told me it is their policy not to charge within a certain range. I forget if it was 1.5 or 2.5 cm.
I told them I would like to appeal their decision. They replied that there is no appeals process. I then asked how do I get this in front of a judge. They replied it will not get in front of a judge because I'm not being charged. At this point I was beyond frustrated. They clearly know that their system is flawed and the regulations vague at best. Any judge would clearly see this and side with the hunter.
During my drive out to sheep hunting I called a CO to clarify the new regulations. She informed me the new jig system "makes it black or white whether the sheep is legal or not". Yet here I am with no sheep and no charges. It makes no sense to me that they can keep the sheep without charging me. In my opinion the sheep is either legal and I keep it or it is illegal and they keep it and I get charged.
Anyone out there dealt with something similar before? I want to fight to get the skull and meat back. A lawyer suggested that writing an appeal to the Minister of Wildlife would be my best bet. Others told me a civil suit would be in order. I haven't found one that will handle it on the civil side. They seem to handle criminal charges.
They are wasting this animal with their moving goal posts.
You can see here they have it set well forward of the eye.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/lggmyujqin...25956.jpg?dl=0
This is when I was allowed to adjust the jig.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/8d4jgxcr4b...11540.jpg?dl=0
|
I feel terrible for you. This is an unconscionable ripoff. I wouldn’t quit until you get an attorney to take this on. What if they decided after the fact that there is now this jig that measures whether the 3rd or 6th point on an elk and that their jig, and only their jig, makes it legal. This is crap. There is no indication in the regs that state the eye socket instead of the eyeball. It just says “anterior edge of eye”, not a caped-out eye orbit. You have a case. That sheep is your property. Harvest was legal.
|
10-07-2019, 10:32 PM
|
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 1,906
|
|
They have always tried to create a grey area. There is no grey area.
|
10-07-2019, 11:53 PM
|
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Northern Alberta
Posts: 1,704
|
|
Contact
Contact Ken Nowicki, out in BC. He has retired for the most part, but he is likely the most renowned Lawyer and sheep hunter defender and I suspect he would offer some free advice and direction to take this. He gets quite angry with these types of traps against hunters. He might be quite up for taking a run at them if a couple of victims organize a group suit.
For what its worth, angles aside, thats a clean 4/5 ths.
If your not charged & had a tag, they need to return your personal property.
Contact the head office in edmonton and speak with the manager of Fish and Feathers. Also call your MLA!
Another black eye for SRD/F&W
|
10-08-2019, 07:41 AM
|
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Calgary
Posts: 695
|
|
Russian: The other point is that the regs clearly state that the line drawn is from the anterior point of the VISIBLE base of the horn not the base of the horn that is revealed when you cape it out. So that's moving your line forward also, in addition to this eye orbit fabrication. Don't quit.
|
10-08-2019, 07:48 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 98
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Full Curl Earl
Contact Ken Nowicki, out in BC. He has retired for the most part, but he is likely the most renowned Lawyer and sheep hunter defender and I suspect he would offer some free advice and direction to take this. He gets quite angry with these types of traps against hunters. He might be quite up for taking a run at them if a couple of victims organize a group suit.
For what its worth, angles aside, thats a clean 4/5 ths.
If your not charged & had a tag, they need to return your personal property.
Contact the head office in edmonton and speak with the manager of Fish and Feathers. Also call your MLA!
Another black eye for SRD/F&W
|
Thanks for the lead on Ken, I sent an email to his telusplanet and gmail accounts that I found googling. Do you have any other contact information for him if he doesn't check those accounts any more?
|
10-08-2019, 07:53 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 98
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by alder
I feel terrible for you. This is an unconscionable ripoff. I wouldn’t quit until you get an attorney to take this on. What if they decided after the fact that there is now this jig that measures whether the 3rd or 6th point on an elk and that their jig, and only their jig, makes it legal. This is crap. There is no indication in the regs that state the eye socket instead of the eyeball. It just says “anterior edge of eye”, not a caped-out eye orbit. You have a case. That sheep is your property. Harvest was legal.
|
Thanks alder! Don't forget that they won't tell you how they will measure with the secret jig.
I shot a nice 6 pt elk (in a 3 pt zone) a couple weeks ago and was relieved that I didn't have to go through a mandatory registration nightmare with it.
|
10-08-2019, 07:53 AM
|
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 1,906
|
|
He uses his gmail account.
|
10-08-2019, 09:41 AM
|
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Northern Alberta
Posts: 1,704
|
|
Which office
Which office is being the issue? Is it one culprit or a few different offices?
|
10-08-2019, 09:43 AM
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Taber
Posts: 175
|
|
OR and aarjay
What offices did you take ur sheep too ?
Sounds like it has more to do with these biologists
Thanks
|
10-08-2019, 10:34 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 98
|
|
I took mine into the Edmonton office.
Just got off the phone with Ken. He is confident that my sheep is legal. He was also contacted by a gentleman with a similar story last night.
He referred me to an Edmonton lawyer to get it in front of a judge and said he would come in as an expert witness. This will be an expensive endeavor. Hopefully we can get some funding from the community and WSF to help fight this. If precedence is set it will help prevent future sheep being wasted by this flawed system.
I will keep you guys posted.
|
10-08-2019, 11:44 AM
|
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Northern Alberta
Posts: 1,704
|
|
Perfect
Thats good news.
|
10-08-2019, 01:03 PM
|
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,032
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldRussian
I took mine into the Edmonton office.
Just got off the phone with Ken. He is confident that my sheep is legal. He was also contacted by a gentleman with a similar story last night.
He referred me to an Edmonton lawyer to get it in front of a judge and said he would come in as an expert witness. This will be an expensive endeavor. Hopefully we can get some funding from the community and WSF to help fight this. If precedence is set it will help prevent future sheep being wasted by this flawed system.
I will keep you guys posted.
|
Good stuff man, sorry for your hardship, good for you for standing up for your (our) rights!!!!!!
__________________
feeding the occasional troll.
|
10-08-2019, 01:44 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Okotoks
Posts: 775
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldRussian
I took mine into the Edmonton office.
Just got off the phone with Ken. He is confident that my sheep is legal. He was also contacted by a gentleman with a similar story last night.
He referred me to an Edmonton lawyer to get it in front of a judge and said he would come in as an expert witness. This will be an expensive endeavor. Hopefully we can get some funding from the community and WSF to help fight this. If precedence is set it will help prevent future sheep being wasted by this flawed system.
I will keep you guys posted.
|
I'm not sure if crowdfunding like GoFundMe is the right way to go or not but I'd be willing to pitch in some cash for you to fight this.
I don't view it a you fighting for your sheep back, I view it as you fighting for all sheep hunters.
|
10-08-2019, 01:59 PM
|
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 1,906
|
|
I see they have the jig adjusted to the eye socket in the first pic, which is not what the regulations say. The second pic I would say you have the jig adjusted correctly to follow the regulations. But I cannot tell if your ram is legal or not following our current regulations because the pic is not in profile, that ram is very close either way.
|
10-08-2019, 02:01 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 98
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by KyleSS
I'm not sure if crowdfunding like GoFundMe is the right way to go or not but I'd be willing to pitch in some cash for you to fight this.
I don't view it a you fighting for your sheep back, I view it as you fighting for all sheep hunters.
|
You're absolutely right that it will be for all sheep hunters and not just myself. With any luck I am successful and can put the blueprint out there for other guys that are getting screwed.
Once I get all my ducks in a row I will definitely be starting a gofundme or crowdfund. I am a blue collar guy, so it will be necessary.
|
10-08-2019, 02:33 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 10,224
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldRussian
I took mine into the Edmonton office.
Just got off the phone with Ken. He is confident that my sheep is legal. He was also contacted by a gentleman with a similar story last night.
He referred me to an Edmonton lawyer to get it in front of a judge and said he would come in as an expert witness. This will be an expensive endeavor. Hopefully we can get some funding from the community and WSF to help fight this. If precedence is set it will help prevent future sheep being wasted by this flawed system.
I will keep you guys posted.
|
I can hear Ken now....
He does get passionate. Probably the best choice for a lawyer on this matter.
Спасибо OldRussian!
It is an absolute disgrace that F&W would implement such a process and allow staff to do this to Hunters. What a shame....
F&W should be disgusted with their actions and quickly offering up apologies and compensation where they have wronged people.
F&W should NOT be making hunters go to court to correct this obviously flawed policy, regulation and maneuvers.
The WSFAb should be butting heads HARD on this issue.
Emails and calls to Minister Nixon from the public are in order.
aep.minister@gov.ab.ca
780 427-2391
and Matt Besko
Section Head
Wildlife Management Policy
matt.besko@gov.ab.ca
__________________
Alberta Fish and Wildlife Outdoor Recreation Policy -
"to identify very rare, scarce or special forms of fish and wildlife outdoor recreation opportunities and to ensure that access to these opportunities continues to be available to all Albertans."
|
10-08-2019, 02:36 PM
|
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: calgary
Posts: 691
|
|
I give my full support for anyone that wants to fight for us sheep hunters. Put those - fishcops deeper in there hole that that have dug themselves to far into to trust anymore. Just so you know I have first hand experience with them and legal rams that where taken away. Judge will say yes it’s legal but we will not set precedence so the ram will go into the wearhouse with all the other rams that have been confiscated rightfully so or not. I know that it cost somebody $50,000 and years of battling to get the above outcome, and the individual fishcops will never be held accountable, they get paid overtime to sit it court. They drive the government vehicles to court and fill it with free taxpayer gas. They sit there as the overtime $$$ show up on there Paycheck there is never any disciplinary action they get back to work the next day no harm no foul to them. Only harm
And foul is to your time and bank account.
|
Thread Tools |
|
Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:06 AM.
|