Poached Elk Confiscated

[Tim McLagan]

I just had a visit from the state police, and they confiscated an elk I took in last week, apparently the guy shot the elk on private property. he paid me the 1/2 down that is required, I caped the elk, and sent the cape to be tanned, and boiled the skull cap, and cleaned the antlers, removed the Ivory teeth, wrote the order, dealt with the state police, and turned over the antlers, and teeth to the police, and when the cape returns, I will have to contact the police, so they can come get the cape. my contract does not state deposit non-refundable.  Now my Question: Do I give any of the deposit back or is he SOL : The customer is also a police officer (he he ) Any Thoughts,  Thanks,  Tim  Ü

[EastonWest]

Heck no I wouldn't give it back,  he took the risk of poaching the animal and he got caught, so like you said he's "SOL".  He knew there was a chance of getting caught with it when he took it to you to mount it.  It fully justifies that you keep the payment.  He'll be paying a lot more for that elk anyway.

[gab]

in similar situations I have itemized a bill,then refunded the difference.example:skinning,fleshing$200;tanning$125;freight both ways$40;boiling$15;documetation fee $20;total $400.so if he gave a $500 deposit give him the statement and $100.

[Doug Bridges]

No refund. Consider it some of the additional "Price" to be paid for breaking the law. You did the amount of work plus the tanning. That can be considered equal to the deposit.

[John C]

No refund!!!! No questions, tell him to file charges if he wants, haha. Maybe a letter to the editor  of your local paper.

[RJ Simington]

Hi Tim,
I had the Exact thing happen 5 years ago & talked to a lawyer at the time.
Your deposit is for labor & material costs, not for the finished product.

It was his idea to get you involved in this so I would tell him to take a flying leap & then call the other taxidermists in the area & tell them his name so they will not have to go through the same thing in the future with this guy.
It is not defimation if he is found guilty in court .
Oregon Hunters posts names every issue of hunters after the trial has found them to be guilty.

Take care

[Jims Wildlife Studio]

I would consider it for payment on the work already done. My prices are subject to change tell him. lol

[John C]

No need to say  My prices are subject to change.

You have done the work already,,   now he also knows he is being investigated for POACHING. This also brings  with it the trouble you may face in the future of having to testify, time off from work etc. It could also make you suspect for future checks by game wardens and being checked often.

You may also have to place and ad in the newspaper, stating  you did not have knowledge about the elk being poached. Or maybe a letter to the editor, there are still implications down the road of things you may have to do keep him from discrediting you, to protect your good name.

[paul e]

no refund should be made
his problem
he broke the rules

[Tim McLagan]

Thanks for the input, I was thinking on those lines also. He was from out of my area, and a cop to top that.
John C  I am not worried about the wardens , I didn't and don't do any thing wrong, and I do a lot of work for them, They have a wall of shame, they take to the sports shows, so I will probably get to mount this elk any how.

Thanks again for all the responses.
                                                    Tim    Ü

[FishArt]

Poached or trespassing Tim??? We had a similar case here in Illinois where a near record Whitetail expired 30 yards onto some adjacent private property. The hunter retrieved the deer w/o the adjacent landowners permission. Long story short, the DNR initially confiscated his deer because the adjacent landowner filed a (trespassing) charge. And he wanted this guys deer (bad neighborly relationship) Eventually through the courts the guy paid a fine for trespassing and did get his deer back. So, depending on your customers circumstances, he may or may not be in the same boat. Unless you know all the facts (which you probably won't until after this guy goes to court) you may or may not be wrongfully accusing this guy of something far more serious. In the Illinois scenario, it was an honest mistake. the guy thought he was still on property he had permission to hunt on. Just throwing this out there as food for thought...

[George Roof]

I guess I'm different.  I take a deposit on the completed mount.  I'm not judge and jury nor appeals court, so that doesn't wash it with me.  I like gab's approach better to satisfy MYSELF.  I'd give him an itemized list of costs already incurred.  If they matched the deposit, so be it, if they were more, I'd add it to the bill and have it part of the ajudication dispensations, and if it was less, I'd refund the money he'd paid over my itemized list.  I sleep well at night because I worry about how I might be perceived by others when I say I'm an honest businessman.  If I was a politician, I could rationalize taking it all if he'd paid over what I'd spent.

[Tim McLagan]

There is no comparison to your situation Fish Art, Here in Oregon, your guy only would of, had to contact State Police, and they would have escorted your guy on to the private property to retrieve his animal. In this situation, this guy was on private property, and so was the elk. Thats poaching, and trespassing.

I agree with gab and George, itemize cost incurred and refund balance.

Thanks again for the input. Tim   Ü

[FishArt]

Tim - yeah that's what the guy here in Illinois SHOULD have done and we would have never read about it other than his pic in all the magazines!

This has nothing to do with your situation, but for debates sake...

I guess I'm unfamiliar with what constitutes "poaching" I'm not condoning what this guy did, but in my mind IF somebody has the proper tags, they're hunting with the proper weapon and the animal they are hunting is in season - In effect IF they weren't trespassing then they'd be totally legal. Then, in MY MIND this person has done a lesser crime in MY MIND than (say) somebody that was shining deer and truly "poaching" an animal. ("Poaching" by my definition). Trouncing on somebody's property w/o permission certainly isn't cool - and again I'm not condoning what he did. But, I'm just curious as to WHY this is considered "Poaching" vs. "Trespassing" Other than hunting on private property w/o permission - did he harvest this animal unethically too??? ("Unethically" on top of the "unethical" access to private land...)

Just curious...

[Tim McLagan]

Fish Art,

In the Websters dictionary.  "POACH"  to cook eggs, by breaking them into a pan of boiling water.  AND  to take game or fish from another's property without permission. End of Debate ! LOL    Ü