Massive Quebec CO fail

I have never seen any as bad as these 2 guys were. And also, given that the department would proceed with charges, and wait 5 years before going to court also says a lot about the system there.

I got a ticket while fishing for Walleye in Quebec a year and a half ago. Still haven't received it. Game warden had no idea what the fine for having a fish too small (2 cm to small). The system in Quebec is crap. The COs have no idea what the fines are because they are decided by the courts and i was told it can take years before receiving the ticket.
 
My wife and her girlfriend love to see deer in the wild and take pictures of them. They even drive on the back roads at night and use the car headlights to spot the deer in the field. She also loves me and when she sees a beautiful buck in a field she calls me on the cellphone to tell me about it. Since I am an avid hunter, I drive over to the specified field in order to check that buck. If it is a good looking specimen than my friend ‘Rambo’ and I take a quick shot, dump the deer in the back of the pick-up and away we go. My wife and her friend are really good spotters for our deer trade.
In the law a spotter is just as guilty as the poacher.

In your case it is presumption of poaching since you were using your headlights to spot the field the same as my wife and her girlfriend do for me.

Bullsh_____!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
Believe me the dumb ones aren't limited to employment in Quebec. We have them in Alberta as well. I was charged with guiding and hunting at the same time and hadn't even stopped the truck yet as we were about halfway to our destination. Went to court and it was dismissed. Seems the dip#### couldn't even remember what happened during the stop and didn't have one note to fall back on. What a waste of time and the courts efforts.
 
Hey - I think it's nuts that they are going after you guys when there are certainly bigger offenses being committed, but from the MRNF's site:

It is prohibited:

  • to use a spotlight at night to detect the presence of an animal in an area where big game is found;
 
Here are the rules taken from the hunter's rule book resume.

Sunrise and sunset

To find out the time of sunrise and sunset, consult a local newspaper or the following web site .
This latter reference is expressed in eastern standard time.

A GPS may also be used to find out the time of sunrise and sunset.

It is prohibited:
•to use a spotlight at night to detect the presence of an animal in an area where big game is found;

•to hunt caribou, white-tailed deer, moose and black bear at night using a spotlight;
• to hunt using night vision equipment;
•to have in one’s possession, at night, in a location frequented by wildlife, a loaded firearm or an armed crossbow without a reasonable excuse or unless practicing an authorized hunting activity


You say that you were in a car looking over the property at night. There is wildlife on that property. You used the headlights to either check the property or to spot for deer. Therefore you were charged with presumption of poaching by the game warden, after he had observed you for a reasonable time. The judge is the one who will decide if you are guilty or not, after you explain your side of the story and the game warden will say what he observed that night. Do you have any notes that you took at the time?
 
Power tripping imbeciles in law enforcement are a huge problem over here. Especially in the regions. I'm sorry for your troubles, papaclaude.
 
Hey - I think it's nuts that they are going after you guys when there are certainly bigger offenses being committed, but from the MRNF's site:

It is prohibited:

  • to use a spotlight at night to detect the presence of an animal in an area where big game is found;

Understood - but is it then illegal to drive on or near rural land at night with your headlights on (and certainly without hunting gear)? Even if scanning a field with spotlights - who's to say that someone is not searching their property for wolves, coyotes, thieves or even my challenged drunk uncle that wandered off this afternoon. What I am reading here is that people are being charged on what they are presumed to be doing based on their possession of, well light! Caught with a bucket full of fish or a deer in the bed. Yep charge 'em - and charge them severely. See someone scanning a field with a flashlight and no rifle and to charge them - well thats just ridiculous (but sadly believable). The province and the fed have hired WAY too many people that the RCMP an military have passed on.
 
My wife and her girlfriend love to see deer in the wild and take pictures of them. They even drive on the back roads at night and use the car headlights to spot the deer in the field. She also loves me and when she sees a beautiful buck in a field she calls me on the cellphone to tell me about it. Since I am an avid hunter, I drive over to the specified field in order to check that buck. If it is a good looking specimen than my friend ‘Rambo’ and I take a quick shot, dump the deer in the back of the pick-up and away we go. My wife and her friend are really good spotters for our deer trade.
In the law a spotter is just as guilty as the poacher.

In your case it is presumption of poaching since you were using your headlights to spot the field the same as my wife and her girlfriend do for me.

So in Quebec, there is such a thing as presumption of guilt? If I recall, we didn't even have a cell phone to call our "buddies" to shoot Bambi. I'm not saying that sort of thing doesn't go on, but if it's the best case they can make against a guy, and they win it, then it means anyone entering their driveway in rural Quebec had better have their headlights off, and they may want to drive with the lights off, in case they do shine on a deer. And, no, we did not use our headlights to "spot" the field. We turned off the road into a short laneway (not really a driveway, but it stopped at the fence line), he explained to me the "history" of the property, roughly what was on it in terms of maple and oak, then we backed out and drove on down the road. After that, we went to town, bought a box of beer, a 40-pounder, and picked up a gallon of maple syrup from his buddy. We may also have gone to see another guy about some kiln-dried hardwood lumber, but I don't remember if it was that night or the next day.

As far as the time elapsed, we definitely did not leave with any paperwork that night. We were told it would go to Quebec City, I believe, and they would make the final decision. As far as I know, he got something in the mail a year ago or so, and told them he would plead not guilty. I am pretty sure that if he had received anything before that, he would have told me, and I asked his son, who is very good friends with my son, about it, and he hadn't heard either. Another odd thing - we were both in the truck, yet he is the only one charged. You'd think they would rather nab a non-resident for poaching AND hunting without a license??? Although I was not driving. The whole thing stinks.
 
Hey - I think it's nuts that they are going after you guys when there are certainly bigger offenses being committed, but from the MRNF's site:

It is prohibited:

  • to use a spotlight at night to detect the presence of an animal in an area where big game is found;

But we didn't have so much as a penlight on us. It was only the truck headlights. I don't remember if they were on high beam or not, but we never exited the truck at any time, we did not roll down the windows. Honest to God, all we did is pull into this laneway, we were stopped for maybe a minute, we backed out, and that was it. There is nothing I am not mentioning, nothing hidden, I have never been convicted of poaching in Ontario or Quebec and as far as I know, neither has my buddy. I know it sounds really odd, but what I am telling you is the whole story.
 
Here are the rules taken from the hunter's rule book resume.

Sunrise and sunset

To find out the time of sunrise and sunset, consult a local newspaper or the following web site .
This latter reference is expressed in eastern standard time.

A GPS may also be used to find out the time of sunrise and sunset.

It is prohibited:
•to use a spotlight at night to detect the presence of an animal in an area where big game is found;

•to hunt caribou, white-tailed deer, moose and black bear at night using a spotlight;
• to hunt using night vision equipment;
•to have in one’s possession, at night, in a location frequented by wildlife, a loaded firearm or an armed crossbow without a reasonable excuse or unless practicing an authorized hunting activity


You say that you were in a car looking over the property at night. There is wildlife on that property. You used the headlights to either check the property or to spot for deer. Therefore you were charged with presumption of poaching by the game warden, after he had observed you for a reasonable time. The judge is the one who will decide if you are guilty or not, after you explain your side of the story and the game warden will say what he observed that night. Do you have any notes that you took at the time?

There was no poaching. I don't know how you define reasonable time, but I am absolutely certain that we were not at either field for more than one minute. As far as notes go, no, I did not take any, because I thought this was utterly stupid and that nothing would ever come of it. Come on, how in hell can you be charged with poaching when all you have on your feet are slippers, you have nothing to hunt with, nothing to call anyone with???? BTW, I have never had a QC hunting license (and trust me, I will never again have either a hunting or fishing license from that God-forsaken hell-hole), and I'm pretty sure my buddy doesn't hunt either, althoug he does enjoy target shooting. His sons and daughter hunt, but I'm pretty sure he doesn't.
 
Hey - I think it's nuts that they are going after you guys when there are certainly bigger offenses being committed, but from the MRNF's site:

It is prohibited:

  • to use a spotlight at night to detect the presence of an animal in an area where big game is found;

WTF? So if I'm out camping with my family, noise gets heard in the bush, wifey freaks thinking it's the biggest teddy bear in Ontario, I whip out a Surefire or my ATV Monster Spotlight and shine it on a deer or even a late night squirrel, I can be charged if a Game Warden was somehow around????

When we go out "jeeping" we have bloody million bazillon candle spotlights everywhere especially if we are spotting on a night trail and trying to avoid moose/deer/bears/other jeeps/bloody Toyota FJ's and H3's lol.

Surely there must be more to that law.
 
This is probably what the game warden’s report will look like.


On September 23 2008, at 20h00, we, Tom Smith and John Blacksmith, both game wardens on duty were on a stakeout at this location W45.0987, N 75.0987. Deer hunting season was supposed to begin the next morning. Using night vision we observed a truck, with two men aboard, approach slowly down the road as the two men scanned the field with great care. The truck slowed down and entered a small lane in the field and stopped. The two men continued to scan the field for a minute or two than decided to back out of the lane and continue down the road slowly to the next lane that enters another field. The truck entered this second lane and stopped for one or two minutes while the occupants were observed scanning the field. The truck than backed out of the lane and drove on the road slowly. It is at that point that we intercepted the said truck. ETC………..
 
I think it doesn't apply to QC only. People are people everywhere and people make mistakes. QC is wonderful for moose, bear, and for white geese, so I wouldn't count QC out. A wonderful hunting destination indeed!
 
When were the charges laid? Were there any adjournments to the trial? If so who asked for the adjournment(s)? Has your friend requested disclosure?
 
=
When were the charges laid? Were there any adjournments to the trial? If so who asked for the adjournment(s)? Has your friend requested disclosure?

I have no idea as to when the charges were laid. I don't believe there were any adjournments, as my friend says the only thing he got (AFAIK) was a ticket to which he indicated he would plead not guilty. As far as disclosure goes, I don't know.
 
Charter application under s.11(b)

11. Any person charged with an offence has the right

(b) to be tried within a reasonable time

No judge would consider 5 years for a summary conviction offence a reasonable time. I cannot imagine a Judge ruling in the CO's favour based on what the OP posted.
 
Charter application under s.11(b)

11. Any person charged with an offence has the right

(b) to be tried within a reasonable time

No judge would consider 5 years for a summary conviction offence a reasonable time. I cannot imagine a Judge ruling in the CO's favour based on what the OP posted.


Bingo.
 
As for the folks talking about taking pictures or shinning lights to looks for animals without a firearm.............

Here in Saskatchewan and many other places , ANY pursuit of wildlife is considered hunting camera, lighting, etc...........

The hunting regulations can and will be applied.

Out here in Saskatchewan you could be charged with what took place but after a simple explanation(politely) nothing would have likely come of it.
 
Back
Top Bottom