Don't believe everything you see in Instagram etc(poaching)

[204guy]

Well poaching is poaching, right? Seems like most feel you can poach a coyote, I personally don’t but I don’t know of any state that would charge you where you don’t need a license. Trespassing and shooting a weapon in a prohibited area to me is where he broke the law.

In the end I wasn’t there and only know what was in the article. Personally I could careless about this greentree guy and am not a fan of the Instagram celebrities but I sure wouldn’t put someone for killing a coyote illegally in the same category as someone that kills an elk, bighorn, bear etc illegally.

You're in luck. In WY coyotes are a nongame species. No license, open 24/7/365, pretty much any method of take is legal. The vast majority of Yellowstone is in located within the state of WY. Shoot a coyote across the park line and post it on social media with a clearly visible landmark in the background. I bet a $100 you make the national news.

 

[tdhanses]

You're in luck. In WY coyotes are a nongame species. No license, open 24/7/365, pretty much any method of take is legal. The vast majority of Yellowstone is in located within the state of WY. Shoot a coyote across the park line and post it on social media with a clearly visible landmark in the background. I bet a $100 you make the national news.

Haha, I bet you are right and I also bet hunting rights and a poaching fine wouldn’t be in there but I’ll let the Greentrees of the world test it out.

 

[jlaner0408]

Isn’t tines up the same clan that knucklehead hushin’ guy was a part of?

 

[Jacob_Outdoors]

page 74 if you wanna read the tines up story

https://cpw.state.co.us/Documents/R...5FileBab4A9anJc2noPIbQVIKlMp7HaaFzSUsmljKxSRo

The problem is people forget very quickly. I’ve heard probably half a dozen stories of well known hunters who have been found guilty of poaching. After reading this story I gave social media a quick look.

TinesUp has 91k instagram followers and seems to do pretty well with retail sales. I wonder how many people wearing their merch are aware that one of the main guys is a known poacher and liar?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[TimberDoodle]

Ive said before Australia isn't US, we have almost a culture of poaching working in the shadows because enforcement has been so lax. I could point people to a dozen social media pages of guys who promote clean ethical hunting and all that jazz that are prolific poachers, some of whom have been caught. One that comes to mind is bigger than AG in that world.

There's a guy i hunted with up until recently that openly admitted he poaches private property with a bow. I could report him but if you've read the thread up to now you'll see what come of my last report to our game department of poaching i.e. nothing.

To even be pursued in Australia you don't have to be a bad poacher, you have to be so bad that police are sick of having reports of the same guy doing it.

Australia is a nanny state, AG will be convicted but i imagine he'll do a deal to plead guilty without receiving a conviction or something pathetic like that. It's most definietly going to be nothing like the fines you see in the states though, and probably no loss of privileges.



Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

Congrats - you pretty much nailed it! For some reason, lots of folks on the bowsite seem to support the poacher sympathy...

 

[NateK]

Laws are laws and we need to follow them. I'm not saying I've never broken any laws in my life but it seems like the longer I'm around (which really hasn't been that long) the less I'm tempted. If you've hunted whitetails in the eastern US for any length of time you have probably been tempted to shoot deer on adjoining properties simply because of parcel size. Our neighbors growing up even built 2x4 ladder stands on my grandparents farm! I know plenty of guys around were I live have killed their best bucks at night or with modern rifles in muzzleloader season or just over a property line. Not guys that routinely break game laws but guys who got greedy when a big buck kept giving them the slip. If you poached a critter last season don't tell me about it because I will report it. Period.

If you don't have the self control to obey the freakin rules (even the silly ones) when presented with a big buck/bull/whatever then you for damn sure shouldn't be plastering your name and face all over the web as a role model and trying to make money off of guys who have never killed a big critter because they didn't take a shot over a property line or bend some other rule.

I'm not anti AG and have enjoyed watching some of his content (but did him and Cam really eat that buff leg or was that just for TV...) but his continuing to push the image he has created despite this incident is disgraceful. I'm not sending any money, likes, or any other positive backing to someone who breaks hunting laws and then acts like its no big deal. If you broke a rule in the past, admitted your guilt, apologized, and now champion upholding the law and having some personal integrity I'm OK with that. Not this "weather the news cycle and it will all work out" BS.

I guess its too much to ask for guys to just be honest online. I mean, look at my pic on here, I made that mid 130s buck look like a solid 150s!

 

[JPHuntingAUS]

Congrats - you pretty much nailed it! For some reason, lots of folks on the bowsite seem to support the poacher sympathy...

I'm just very familiar with the attitudes of contemporary hunters in Australia. He has a complete lack of respect for the resource and considers them a tool for social recognition as do many people. If it happened in my state where deer are given more protection he would have received a bit more of a kick up the arse though.

The vast majority of true hunters value deer, it's a part of who we are as humans. Devaluing them as pests to justify killing them is done purely because some people see it as an unlimited resource. If however they were to produce a biological agent which was capable of wiping deer out, similar to what is about to be released in australia for feral carp all these guys would be the first to squeal that we need to keep deer here.

Not directed at yourself, but it's easy for an american without the understanding of the way our environment works here to say "well it's only a feral/non game animal so he's not really poaching". But it all comes back to what we are exposed to culturally. By this i mean, i don't believe it would take long for the average american to come to australia and hunt with people like greentree and then slip into the same mindset. That doesn't make it right or acceptable.

I truly believe that as long as this "stag culture" which is to say the culture of focussing primarily on the size of antlers, killing them at any cost and being praised on social media for doing so it will only get worse. I have genuine concerns for the world my son has to inherit if things don't change.

 

[maddmartagan]

I'll admit I have a very biased opinion. I do not like Greentree. He seems like an overly dramatic attention whore. But even knowing that, I still hope I can provide some arguments that change how people view this incident (especially those that are using the "pest" argument), which I find pretty disturbing for a professional hunter who claims to be big on ethics, conservation, etc.

I feel like the article is pretty biased itself and downplays Greentree's actions, especially considering the use of the quotes "pest" and "game animal" (what is the writer quoting?! how about a source bro). But lets even assume that the article has no bias. Nothing here says that red deer are actually pests in the National Park. The article (and who knows where it is getting its information) says that the deer are "managed" as a pest. As someone stated earlier, they are actually classified as game animals, and the article mentions this as well, although also in quotes. In comparison, I could easily say that Bison are managed as a pest in Yellowstone. I mean 1,200 were killed in 2017 alone.(https://www.yellowstonepark.com/park/culling-last-wild-herd-bison). Go kill a Bison in or around Yellowstone and see if one of our judges says "Meh, that's okay. We were going to kill a bunch of them anyways so its just one less that we have to cull." This is the comparison I feel you should be using. Not the ridiculous coyote one. A coyote has never been classified as a game animal. And again, I can't stress the fact that it says MANAGED as a "pest". What does that even mean? Managed like Bison are in Yellowstone? Managed like Deer are in certain National Wildlife Refuges where they give out a limited amount of archery tags each season to keep the numbers low because they are "pests". Or maybe they are managed as "pests" just like every game animal is managed here in the states. Would I technically be wrong if I said "Deer are classified as "game animals" here in the United States, but they are managed like "pests" because of all the damage they cause from car collisions." To a lot of people, this is a true statement, especially to those that use population control as an argument in favor of hunting. So until someone provides a little more insight on the "pest" thing, then I am going to focus on the actual fact. They are classified/declared a game animal.

The second reason I think this incident is more egregious than people are admitting is because the DPI (Aussie's Fish and Game I guess) thought that Greentree's actions were serious enough to warrant a pretty intensive investigation. I mean they saw some pictures on social media and decided that those pictures alone were enough to warrant an investigation, which then led them to hike out into the National Park and actually find the carcass of the deer. I mean, they could have hiked around out there for hours or even multiple days and found absolutely nothing, and they still thought it was worth their time to try and build a case against him, even with the risk that nothing would come of it. I don't know many game wardens here that would go through all that work if someone killed a coyote and posted it on social media, as some of you would like to compare to this incident. I feel pretty bad for the DPI. Can you imagine going through all that work to gather evidence, build a case, bring charges, wait months while he delayed the court dates and then have him actually PLEAD GUILTY, just to have the Judge/Magistrate say "yea but its your first time and they were pests. Get outta here you ol' goofball! No conviction!"

To me, it seems that the Magistrate just doesn't know/care about hunting rules and regulations and why they are so important. ESPECIALLY if you are a public figure in hunting. (Honestly I think there was something deeper going on like the magistrate was his friend or something, but I'm not going to use that as the main argument because it'll never be proven.) But again, I'll admit I'm biased cause I just do not like the guy. That still doesn't mean that what he did was I feel a lot more serious than "shooting a coyote" as some of you suggest. Its the fact that he has made his career out of the hunting industry, so yes he will be held to a much higher standard than every other hunter.

 

[JPHuntingAUS]

I'll admit I have a very biased opinion. I do not like Greentree. He seems like an overly dramatic attention whore. But even knowing that, I still hope I can provide some arguments that change how people view this incident (especially those that are using the "pest" argument), which I find pretty disturbing for a professional hunter who claims to be big on ethics, conservation, etc.

I feel like the article is pretty biased itself and downplays Greentree's actions, especially considering the use of the quotes "pest" and "game animal" (what is the writer quoting?! how about a source bro). But lets even assume that the article has no bias. Nothing here says that red deer are actually pests in the National Park. The article (and who knows where it is getting its information) says that the deer are "managed" as a pest. As someone stated earlier, they are actually classified as game animals, and the article mentions this as well, although also in quotes. In comparison, I could easily say that Bison are managed as a pest in Yellowstone. I mean 1,200 were killed in 2017 alone.(https://www.yellowstonepark.com/park/culling-last-wild-herd-bison). Go kill a Bison in or around Yellowstone and see if one of our judges says "Meh, that's okay. We were going to kill a bunch of them anyways so its just one less that we have to cull." This is the comparison I feel you should be using. Not the ridiculous coyote one. A coyote has never been classified as a game animal. And again, I can't stress the fact that it says MANAGED as a "pest". What does that even mean? Managed like Bison are in Yellowstone? Managed like Deer are in certain National Wildlife Refuges where they give out a limited amount of archery tags each season to keep the numbers low because they are "pests". Or maybe they are managed as "pests" just like every game animal is managed here in the states. Would I technically be wrong if I said "Deer are classified as "game animals" here in the United States, but they are managed like "pests" because of all the damage they cause from car collisions." To a lot of people, this is a true statement, especially to those that use population control as an argument in favor of hunting. So until someone provides a little more insight on the "pest" thing, then I am going to focus on the actual fact. They are classified/declared a game animal.

The second reason I think this incident is more egregious than people are admitting is because the DPI (Aussie's Fish and Game I guess) thought that Greentree's actions were serious enough to warrant a pretty intensive investigation. I mean they saw some pictures on social media, which then led them to hike out into the National Park and actually find the carcass of the deer. They felt that it was worth their time to try and build a case against him, and not just an easy case, but one where they had to actually do some real leg work. I don't know many game wardens here that would go through all that work if someone killed a coyote and posted it on social media, as some of you would like to compare to this incident. I feel pretty bad for the DPI. Can you imagine going through all that work to gather evidence, build a case, bring charges, wait months while he delayed the court dates and then have him actually PLEAD GUILTY, just to have the Judge/Magistrate say "yea but its your first time and they were pests. Get outta here you ol' goofball! No conviction!"

To me, it seems that the Magistrate just doesn't know/care about hunting rules and regulations and why they are so important. ESPECIALLY if you are a public figure in hunting. (Honestly I think there was something deeper going on like the magistrate was his friend or something, but I'm not going to use that as the main argument because it'll never be proven.) But again, I'll admit I'm biased cause I just do not like the guy. That still doesn't mean that what he did was I feel a lot more serious than "shooting a coyote" as some of you suggest. Its the fact that he has made his career out of the hunting industry, so yes he will be held to a much higher standard than every other hunter.

I really like your attitude toward this, if you're ever down in south east Australia send me a message and I'll see if we can't tee up a hunt.

 

[James270]

I'll admit I have a very biased opinion. I do not like Greentree. He seems like an overly dramatic attention whore. But even knowing that, I still hope I can provide some arguments that change how people view this incident (especially those that are using the "pest" argument), which I find pretty disturbing for a professional hunter who claims to be big on ethics, conservation, etc.

I feel like the article is pretty biased itself and downplays Greentree's actions, especially considering the use of the quotes "pest" and "game animal" (what is the writer quoting?! how about a source bro). But lets even assume that the article has no bias. Nothing here says that red deer are actually pests in the National Park. The article (and who knows where it is getting its information) says that the deer are "managed" as a pest. As someone stated earlier, they are actually classified as game animals, and the article mentions this as well, although also in quotes. In comparison, I could easily say that Bison are managed as a pest in Yellowstone. I mean 1,200 were killed in 2017 alone.(https://www.yellowstonepark.com/park/culling-last-wild-herd-bison). Go kill a Bison in or around Yellowstone and see if one of our judges says "Meh, that's okay. We were going to kill a bunch of them anyways so its just one less that we have to cull." This is the comparison I feel you should be using. Not the ridiculous coyote one. A coyote has never been classified as a game animal. And again, I can't stress the fact that it says MANAGED as a "pest". What does that even mean? Managed like Bison are in Yellowstone? Managed like Deer are in certain National Wildlife Refuges where they give out a limited amount of archery tags each season to keep the numbers low because they are "pests". Or maybe they are managed as "pests" just like every game animal is managed here in the states. Would I technically be wrong if I said "Deer are classified as "game animals" here in the United States, but they are managed like "pests" because of all the damage they cause from car collisions." To a lot of people, this is a true statement, especially to those that use population control as an argument in favor of hunting. So until someone provides a little more insight on the "pest" thing, then I am going to focus on the actual fact. They are classified/declared a game animal.

The second reason I think this incident is more egregious than people are admitting is because the DPI (Aussie's Fish and Game I guess) thought that Greentree's actions were serious enough to warrant a pretty intensive investigation. I mean they saw some pictures on social media and decided that those pictures alone were enough to warrant an investigation, which then led them to hike out into the National Park and actually find the carcass of the deer. I mean, they could have hiked around out there for hours or even multiple days and found absolutely nothing, and they still thought it was worth their time to try and build a case against him, even with the risk that nothing would come of it. I don't know many game wardens here that would go through all that work if someone killed a coyote and posted it on social media, as some of you would like to compare to this incident. I feel pretty bad for the DPI. Can you imagine going through all that work to gather evidence, build a case, bring charges, wait months while he delayed the court dates and then have him actually PLEAD GUILTY, just to have the Judge/Magistrate say "yea but its your first time and they were pests. Get outta here you ol' goofball! No conviction!"

To me, it seems that the Magistrate just doesn't know/care about hunting rules and regulations and why they are so important. ESPECIALLY if you are a public figure in hunting. (Honestly I think there was something deeper going on like the magistrate was his friend or something, but I'm not going to use that as the main argument because it'll never be proven.) But again, I'll admit I'm biased cause I just do not like the guy. That still doesn't mean that what he did was I feel a lot more serious than "shooting a coyote" as some of you suggest. Its the fact that he has made his career out of the hunting industry, so yes he will be held to a much higher standard than every other hunter.

Great post.

Apparently the DPI went to all that trouble just to frame AG.
AG Facebook

 

[jlaner0408]

I know there are a lot of cultural differences between the United States and Australia, but what burns me the most is the fact that at the end of the day, he’s representing all hunters- you, me, and every other person that does things ethically and morally in the world- in a HORRIBLE light. That “explanation” that he has so graciously posted is pathetic and screams guilty conscience. It’s stuff like this that continues to erode the public perception of hunting in both countries, and it will be our downfall if it keeps happening. I’m slightly happy this isn’t getting more exposure simply for the fact that it isn’t getting put on blast For everyone else to see. Staunch supporters of hunting (obviously us) and staunch opposers of hunting will obviously never be swayed- it’s the middle ground of the population that makes or breaks us, and I hope we can do our best to prevent things like this from ever happening and to not condone it when it does. But if people continue to be supported by companies (Hoyt and Easton for sure do it) after they do things like this (ie incidents like the Bowmar’s, Busbice’s, Tines Up, and now Greentree) simply because they have huge social media followings, then we’re our own worst enemy and nothing will ever change after something like this happening.

 

[joeljenewein]

I'll admit I have a very biased opinion. I do not like Greentree. He seems like an overly dramatic attention whore. But even knowing that, I still hope I can provide some arguments that change how people view this incident (especially those that are using the "pest" argument), which I find pretty disturbing for a professional hunter who claims to be big on ethics, conservation, etc.

I feel like the article is pretty biased itself and downplays Greentree's actions, especially considering the use of the quotes "pest" and "game animal" (what is the writer quoting?! how about a source bro). But lets even assume that the article has no bias. Nothing here says that red deer are actually pests in the National Park. The article (and who knows where it is getting its information) says that the deer are "managed" as a pest. As someone stated earlier, they are actually classified as game animals, and the article mentions this as well, although also in quotes. In comparison, I could easily say that Bison are managed as a pest in Yellowstone. I mean 1,200 were killed in 2017 alone.(https://www.yellowstonepark.com/park/culling-last-wild-herd-bison). Go kill a Bison in or around Yellowstone and see if one of our judges says "Meh, that's okay. We were going to kill a bunch of them anyways so its just one less that we have to cull." This is the comparison I feel you should be using. Not the ridiculous coyote one. A coyote has never been classified as a game animal. And again, I can't stress the fact that it says MANAGED as a "pest". What does that even mean? Managed like Bison are in Yellowstone? Managed like Deer are in certain National Wildlife Refuges where they give out a limited amount of archery tags each season to keep the numbers low because they are "pests". Or maybe they are managed as "pests" just like every game animal is managed here in the states. Would I technically be wrong if I said "Deer are classified as "game animals" here in the United States, but they are managed like "pests" because of all the damage they cause from car collisions." To a lot of people, this is a true statement, especially to those that use population control as an argument in favor of hunting. So until someone provides a little more insight on the "pest" thing, then I am going to focus on the actual fact. They are classified/declared a game animal.

The second reason I think this incident is more egregious than people are admitting is because the DPI (Aussie's Fish and Game I guess) thought that Greentree's actions were serious enough to warrant a pretty intensive investigation. I mean they saw some pictures on social media and decided that those pictures alone were enough to warrant an investigation, which then led them to hike out into the National Park and actually find the carcass of the deer. I mean, they could have hiked around out there for hours or even multiple days and found absolutely nothing, and they still thought it was worth their time to try and build a case against him, even with the risk that nothing would come of it. I don't know many game wardens here that would go through all that work if someone killed a coyote and posted it on social media, as some of you would like to compare to this incident. I feel pretty bad for the DPI. Can you imagine going through all that work to gather evidence, build a case, bring charges, wait months while he delayed the court dates and then have him actually PLEAD GUILTY, just to have the Judge/Magistrate say "yea but its your first time and they were pests. Get outta here you ol' goofball! No conviction!"

To me, it seems that the Magistrate just doesn't know/care about hunting rules and regulations and why they are so important. ESPECIALLY if you are a public figure in hunting. (Honestly I think there was something deeper going on like the magistrate was his friend or something, but I'm not going to use that as the main argument because it'll never be proven.) But again, I'll admit I'm biased cause I just do not like the guy. That still doesn't mean that what he did was I feel a lot more serious than "shooting a coyote" as some of you suggest. Its the fact that he has made his career out of the hunting industry, so yes he will be held to a much higher standard than every other hunter.

Very well said.

 

[JP100]

I also look at it this way, we shouldn’t apply our American standards on this, it should purely be Aussie standards.

It’s kind of like how that CA game and fish official legally shot a mountain lion in ID but was then vilified in CA because it’s illegal there to kill a mountain lion.

So I agree as well, what do our Aussie brothers think of this situation?

Everyone I know in the South Pacific thinks Adam is a right ****.
General consensuses is he has no respect for hunting/game and is just in it for the wrong reasons(ie insta fame, cash).

Hence why you NEVER see him in any promotional work down here, hes a nobody down here, hes only 'famous' in north america because the sponsors can push him into an audience that dont know him or his back ground.

Adam owns a small amount of land right on the National Park boundary, its well known the only reason he has that patch of land is to hunt the park, as the land he has is small and there is no way he can get the animals he does off his own block.

Thats my understanding anyways



Regarding the 'pest' status of game animals, that is a tricky one. Here(NZ) we have more 'open' 'laws' regarding hunting than probably anywhere else, BUT poaching is poaching.
Some of our laws make no sense, and yes out goverment kills problem game animals, but you still have to follow the law, especially if you are a 'professional' hunter.

Kinda like me looking at how the Government in BC kills problems bears every year, does that mean its ok for me to go over to BC and kill a 'pest' bear?


The fact he pleaded guilty, then is pushing the idea he was 'set up' shows his character.
If he was innocent he should have fought it in court.

 

[JPHuntingAUS]

To give some further background on the game/pest part. At the moment in New South Wales deer are classed as game. There has however been an outcry from a limited number of farmers which catches the ear of the ever left leaning government about exploding deer numbers and a push to class them as pests.

What isn't mentioned is that this is almost exclusively happening in areas where the deer are living in national park which is prohibited to hunting and then venturing on to farm land. The problem is then exacerbated by the fact that many of these farmers won't allow hunters on their property to hunt deer. They just want the government to pay for big fancy fences and to use 1080 baits which the government appears to be supportive of (read up on 1080 and deer and get your head around that!) and have "professional shooters" to come in.

In my experience whether it's deer, pigs, dingoes or what have you professional shooters are always opposed to recreational hunting. Their argument is that it's ineffective, the obvious truth is that they just want it all to themselves.

To give some perspective of "pests" consider an america without introduced trout, pheasants, pigs etc.

Better yet imagine that all of your native species such as elk, deer, bear, moose, sheep, antelope, goat etc were fully protected as all our native mammals are in Australia with no recreational hunting allowed. Would you still be all for the wholesale slaughter of your introduced big game? Would you stand behind guys like greentree hiding behind the defense of "well they're just introduced" which is essentially condoning from a hunters perspective the extermination and complete devaluing of the species you hunt? Would the governments technical definition of game or pests make a difference to you or what the animals mean to you? Make no mistake, aussies ans kiwis have as great a connection to our animals as you Americans. Yeah our big game aren't native to here, but humans aren't native to America, does that have any bearing on how any of you feel connected to the land or the animals? Does a deer born in australia after 50, 60 or 100 generations have any concept that he is anywhere other than where he belongs. Like most things at face value these arguments are simple but give it a little thought and you'll see it's far more nuanced.

 

[lks2]

I'll admit I have a very biased opinion. I do not like Greentree. He seems like an overly dramatic attention whore. But even knowing that, I still hope I can provide some arguments that change how people view this incident (especially those that are using the "pest" argument), which I find pretty disturbing for a professional hunter who claims to be big on ethics, conservation, etc.

I feel like the article is pretty biased itself and downplays Greentree's actions, especially considering the use of the quotes "pest" and "game animal" (what is the writer quoting?! how about a source bro). But lets even assume that the article has no bias. Nothing here says that red deer are actually pests in the National Park. The article (and who knows where it is getting its information) says that the deer are "managed" as a pest. As someone stated earlier, they are actually classified as game animals, and the article mentions this as well, although also in quotes. In comparison, I could easily say that Bison are managed as a pest in Yellowstone. I mean 1,200 were killed in 2017 alone.(https://www.yellowstonepark.com/park/culling-last-wild-herd-bison). Go kill a Bison in or around Yellowstone and see if one of our judges says "Meh, that's okay. We were going to kill a bunch of them anyways so its just one less that we have to cull." This is the comparison I feel you should be using. Not the ridiculous coyote one. A coyote has never been classified as a game animal. And again, I can't stress the fact that it says MANAGED as a "pest". What does that even mean? Managed like Bison are in Yellowstone? Managed like Deer are in certain National Wildlife Refuges where they give out a limited amount of archery tags each season to keep the numbers low because they are "pests". Or maybe they are managed as "pests" just like every game animal is managed here in the states. Would I technically be wrong if I said "Deer are classified as "game animals" here in the United States, but they are managed like "pests" because of all the damage they cause from car collisions." To a lot of people, this is a true statement, especially to those that use population control as an argument in favor of hunting. So until someone provides a little more insight on the "pest" thing, then I am going to focus on the actual fact. They are classified/declared a game animal.

The second reason I think this incident is more egregious than people are admitting is because the DPI (Aussie's Fish and Game I guess) thought that Greentree's actions were serious enough to warrant a pretty intensive investigation. I mean they saw some pictures on social media and decided that those pictures alone were enough to warrant an investigation, which then led them to hike out into the National Park and actually find the carcass of the deer. I mean, they could have hiked around out there for hours or even multiple days and found absolutely nothing, and they still thought it was worth their time to try and build a case against him, even with the risk that nothing would come of it. I don't know many game wardens here that would go through all that work if someone killed a coyote and posted it on social media, as some of you would like to compare to this incident. I feel pretty bad for the DPI. Can you imagine going through all that work to gather evidence, build a case, bring charges, wait months while he delayed the court dates and then have him actually PLEAD GUILTY, just to have the Judge/Magistrate say "yea but its your first time and they were pests. Get outta here you ol' goofball! No conviction!"

To me, it seems that the Magistrate just doesn't know/care about hunting rules and regulations and why they are so important. ESPECIALLY if you are a public figure in hunting. (Honestly I think there was something deeper going on like the magistrate was his friend or something, but I'm not going to use that as the main argument because it'll never be proven.) But again, I'll admit I'm biased cause I just do not like the guy. That still doesn't mean that what he did was I feel a lot more serious than "shooting a coyote" as some of you suggest. Its the fact that he has made his career out of the hunting industry, so yes he will be held to a much higher standard than every other hunter.

nailed it....... I was also scratching my head at the "pest" discussion in this thread.

 

[S.Clancy]

I'll admit I have a very biased opinion. I do not like Greentree. He seems like an overly dramatic attention whore. But even knowing that, I still hope I can provide some arguments that change how people view this incident (especially those that are using the "pest" argument), which I find pretty disturbing for a professional hunter who claims to be big on ethics, conservation, etc.

I feel like the article is pretty biased itself and downplays Greentree's actions, especially considering the use of the quotes "pest" and "game animal" (what is the writer quoting?! how about a source bro). But lets even assume that the article has no bias. Nothing here says that red deer are actually pests in the National Park. The article (and who knows where it is getting its information) says that the deer are "managed" as a pest. As someone stated earlier, they are actually classified as game animals, and the article mentions this as well, although also in quotes. In comparison, I could easily say that Bison are managed as a pest in Yellowstone. I mean 1,200 were killed in 2017 alone.(https://www.yellowstonepark.com/park/culling-last-wild-herd-bison). Go kill a Bison in or around Yellowstone and see if one of our judges says "Meh, that's okay. We were going to kill a bunch of them anyways so its just one less that we have to cull." This is the comparison I feel you should be using. Not the ridiculous coyote one. A coyote has never been classified as a game animal. And again, I can't stress the fact that it says MANAGED as a "pest". What does that even mean? Managed like Bison are in Yellowstone? Managed like Deer are in certain National Wildlife Refuges where they give out a limited amount of archery tags each season to keep the numbers low because they are "pests". Or maybe they are managed as "pests" just like every game animal is managed here in the states. Would I technically be wrong if I said "Deer are classified as "game animals" here in the United States, but they are managed like "pests" because of all the damage they cause from car collisions." To a lot of people, this is a true statement, especially to those that use population control as an argument in favor of hunting. So until someone provides a little more insight on the "pest" thing, then I am going to focus on the actual fact. They are classified/declared a game animal.

The second reason I think this incident is more egregious than people are admitting is because the DPI (Aussie's Fish and Game I guess) thought that Greentree's actions were serious enough to warrant a pretty intensive investigation. I mean they saw some pictures on social media and decided that those pictures alone were enough to warrant an investigation, which then led them to hike out into the National Park and actually find the carcass of the deer. I mean, they could have hiked around out there for hours or even multiple days and found absolutely nothing, and they still thought it was worth their time to try and build a case against him, even with the risk that nothing would come of it. I don't know many game wardens here that would go through all that work if someone killed a coyote and posted it on social media, as some of you would like to compare to this incident. I feel pretty bad for the DPI. Can you imagine going through all that work to gather evidence, build a case, bring charges, wait months while he delayed the court dates and then have him actually PLEAD GUILTY, just to have the Judge/Magistrate say "yea but its your first time and they were pests. Get outta here you ol' goofball! No conviction!"

To me, it seems that the Magistrate just doesn't know/care about hunting rules and regulations and why they are so important. ESPECIALLY if you are a public figure in hunting. (Honestly I think there was something deeper going on like the magistrate was his friend or something, but I'm not going to use that as the main argument because it'll never be proven.) But again, I'll admit I'm biased cause I just do not like the guy. That still doesn't mean that what he did was I feel a lot more serious than "shooting a coyote" as some of you suggest. Its the fact that he has made his career out of the hunting industry, so yes he will be held to a much higher standard than every other hunter.

Too logical, can't compute.

 

[TimberDoodle]

Anyone catch the Gritty Bowman's defense of Greentree? I don't think it is up any more.

 

[Jtelarkin08]

Anyone catch the Gritty Bowman's defense of Greentree? I don't think it is up any more.

I heard it. I also saw someone post msg from both Hoyt and maven saying Adam was no longer affiliated with them.

If I was in that situation having of sponsors like greentree does and being “in the industry” if I were truly innocent I would have fought to to the end. It has been proven over and over in the hunting industry that its one strike and your out.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Jacob_Outdoors]

I heard it. I also saw someone post msg from both Hoyt and maven saying Adam was no longer affiliated with them.

If I was in that situation having of sponsors like greentree does and being “in the industry” if I were truly innocent I would have fought to to the end. It has been proven over and over in the hunting industry that its one strike and your out.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Has it though? Look at how many people have had poaching or other shady charges brought against them and still continue to operate. Not only having endorsement deals, but selling merchandise and publishing content. Companies are willing to look the other way after a certain amount of time has passed, it’s a business, and only one thing matters most of the time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Jtelarkin08]

Has it though? Look at how many people have had poaching or other shady charges brought against them and still continue to operate. Not only having endorsement deals, but selling merchandise and publishing content. Companies are willing to look the other way after a certain amount of time has passed, it’s a business, and only one thing matters most of the time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I guess I should say in the last 5 years it has proved to be one strike in a lot of cases. Ask Chris bracket. Lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk