Post by: hunterbuilder on September 17, 2015, 03:43:59 PM
https://www.facebook.com/WDFWPolice
Post by: cbond3318 on September 17, 2015, 03:47:50 PM
Post by: JimmyHoffa on September 17, 2015, 03:50:22 PM
Post by: Bean Counter on September 17, 2015, 03:51:11 PM
Post by: X-Force on September 17, 2015, 03:55:56 PM
Ugly
Post by: NRA4LIFE on September 17, 2015, 03:56:55 PM
Post by: h20hunter on September 17, 2015, 03:58:56 PM
Wait a minute.
>:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:(
OUR MATT ALWINE!
"the Matt Alwine" that I have purchased at least one DVD of?
:yike: :yike: :yike: :yike: :yike: :yike:
C'mon Matt.........say it ain't so!
what
the
HECK!
Post by: Karl Blanchard on September 17, 2015, 04:01:46 PM
Post by: h20hunter on September 17, 2015, 04:04:48 PM
Post by: JJB11B on September 17, 2015, 04:05:25 PM
Post by: trophyhunt on September 17, 2015, 04:05:55 PM
Post by: Woodchuck on September 17, 2015, 04:13:12 PM
Post by: JJB11B on September 17, 2015, 04:15:56 PM
Post by: MLBowhunting on September 17, 2015, 04:16:18 PM
Post by: huntnphool on September 17, 2015, 04:16:40 PM
Post by: jackelope on September 17, 2015, 04:17:09 PM
:yike:
:bdid:
Post by: huntnphool on September 17, 2015, 04:20:30 PM
Post by: FWilliams on September 17, 2015, 04:26:43 PM
I can't believe it has taken this long for people to catch wind of this.
[/quote
:yeah:]
Post by: wsmnut on September 17, 2015, 04:27:06 PM
I just came in from setting up a chain to block access to our place SE of Twisp. Already kicked two off that had driven by 2 sets of "Private Property" signs.
I feel better about my time spent doing that now...
Post by: quadrafire on September 17, 2015, 04:27:41 PM
Post by: BAR C3 on September 17, 2015, 04:28:28 PM
Interesting for sure, there is another member on here that we caught taking a deer off my lease in SE Montana a few years ago, the locals are always complaining about all the Washington hunters roaming around over there.:yeah: Love going back there to see family and hear all the story about Washingtonians. Here more about them than Californians. And yes they are all legitimate issues! :bash:
Post by: mdbuck5x5 on September 17, 2015, 04:36:02 PM
According to this article the fine and hunting privileges are worse.
http://www.spokesman.com/blogs/outdoors/2015/sep/17/chewelah-man-trophy-state-mind-video-host-convicted-illegal-hunting-montana/
Post by: Widgeondeke on September 17, 2015, 04:43:08 PM
Post by: HornHoarder on September 17, 2015, 05:16:10 PM
Post by: Woodchuck on September 17, 2015, 05:16:50 PM
Wonder if it was worth it...
Post by: jackmaster on September 17, 2015, 05:20:47 PM
Post by: bowhunterforever on September 17, 2015, 05:29:05 PM
Post by: Timberstalker on September 17, 2015, 05:29:11 PM
Post by: pianoman9701 on September 17, 2015, 05:36:24 PM
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on September 17, 2015, 05:42:59 PM
Post by: pianoman9701 on September 17, 2015, 05:49:13 PM
Post by: 3nails on September 17, 2015, 06:07:26 PM
Post by: Limhangerslayer on September 17, 2015, 06:11:07 PM
Post by: scoyoc5 on September 17, 2015, 06:23:51 PM
Post by: STIKNSTRINGBOW on September 17, 2015, 06:38:21 PM
Quote
Murphy said, “Greed and ego are generally the driving forces behind those that commit multiple wildlife violations. That was especially evident in this case with Alwine boasting about his kills within the same day on his social media sites.”
:dunno:
Hate it when our hero's are caught cheating...
Oh, well...
Bet he has some cameras for sale...
Post by: Limhangerslayer on September 17, 2015, 06:53:53 PM
bet he doesn't, maybe Montana fish and wildlife does :sry:QuoteMurphy said, “Greed and ego are generally the driving forces behind those that commit multiple wildlife violations. That was especially evident in this case with Alwine boasting about his kills within the same day on his social media sites.”
:dunno:
Hate it when our hero's are caught cheating...
Oh, well...
Bet he has some cameras for sale...
Post by: C-Money on September 17, 2015, 07:23:29 PM
Post by: DUGANDEER on September 17, 2015, 07:25:37 PM
Dang. I liked that show. I though Matt and his team were good folks. Man, I hate poachers.
:yeah:
Post by: JimmyHoffa on September 17, 2015, 08:39:04 PM
Post by: cbond3318 on September 17, 2015, 08:42:59 PM
Post by: CAMPMEAT on September 17, 2015, 08:48:29 PM
Post by: j_h_nimrod on September 17, 2015, 09:12:43 PM
Good grief! Nice example to set.
I just came in from setting up a chain to block access to our place SE of Twisp. Already kicked two off that had driven by 2 sets of "Private Property" signs.
I feel better about my time spent doing that now...
Just a reflection and not any defense to the turds that trespass, but I have seen at least three examples of people posting public land and putting up signs that are not correct ( private land past this sign, no public road access). With the number of true signs, false signs, lack of signs, and over posting of signs I am really ready to say get bent any time I may be approached about trespassing. I take every caution I can but you can still be wrong, or right without knowing it. I rarely hunt an area where there is any question but it is still frustrating.
Post by: Bean Counter on September 17, 2015, 09:24:46 PM
Good grief! Nice example to set.
I just came in from setting up a chain to block access to our place SE of Twisp. Already kicked two off that had driven by 2 sets of "Private Property" signs.
I feel better about my time spent doing that now...
Just a reflection and not any defense to the turds that trespass, but I have seen at least three examples of people posting public land and putting up signs that are not correct ( private land past this sign, no public road access). With the number of true signs, false signs, lack of signs, and over posting of signs I am really ready to say get bent any time I may be approached about trespassing. I take every caution I can but you can still be wrong, or right without knowing it. I rarely hunt an area where there is any question but it is still frustrating.
Man buying all those "Private Property, No Tresspassing" signs was the best investment I ever made as a hunter! :IBCOOL:
25,000 acres all to myself and $0 spent on lease fees!!
Now, where did I leave my dummy camp tent? :chuckle:
(https://hunting-washington.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdn.memegenerator.net%2Finstances%2F400x%2F36140112.jpg&hash=01c7eb10b87a96d51be9e632c91f607253b8288c)
Post by: Gringo31 on September 17, 2015, 09:49:21 PM
Choices, choices.....
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: Dan-o on September 17, 2015, 09:52:42 PM
I just can't quite pin point it...... :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle:
P.S. I agree!!
Post by: Bean Counter on September 17, 2015, 09:58:27 PM
:chuckle:
Post by: 10thmountainarcher on September 17, 2015, 10:16:20 PM
Post by: lokidog on September 17, 2015, 10:21:25 PM
Post by: KFhunter on September 17, 2015, 10:26:59 PM
There for a second I forgot you were my idol...
You havent looked very hard for an Idol if you came up with me lol :bdid:
Post by: Fl0und3rz on September 17, 2015, 10:34:26 PM
Post by: Hornseeker on September 17, 2015, 10:35:06 PM
Post by: NumaJohn on September 17, 2015, 10:50:41 PM
I would say he successfully cultivated a certain mystique that was attractive to weekend warriors like me. He was "the man" (or one of them) when it came to hunting, it seemed, but I guess he never really grew up. I don't care how stealthy he was or how good of a shot with a bow, he is nothing more than a poacher. A wildlife thief who turned a buck by taking us all for suckers.
And to think he can be back out there after just 4 seasons...Ugh.
John
Post by: 10thmountainarcher on September 17, 2015, 10:54:53 PM
It's interesting how Matt Alwine had such an alpha presence on the Forum.
I would say he successfully cultivated a certain mystique that was attractive to weekend warriors like me. He was "the man" (or one of them) when it came to hunting, it seemed, but I guess guess he never really grew up. I don't care how stealthy he was or how good of a shot with a bow, he is nothing more than a poacher to me. A wildlife thief who turned a buck by taking us all for suckers.
And to think he can be back out there after just 4 seasons...Ugh.
John
I'm with ya 100% on this one. To look at his photos and read of his hunts made me green with envy. I wish I had the time to dedicate to the woods and harvest the animals as he did. To find out he's nothing more than a criminal is the ultimate disappointment. I'm going to go out on a whim here and say this more than likely isn't an isolated incident...
Post by: KFhunter on September 17, 2015, 10:56:40 PM
Post by: 10thmountainarcher on September 17, 2015, 11:00:34 PM
you wouldn't be out on a limb as the charges span multiple years
I'm thinking more on the lines of multiple states.
Post by: PolarBear on September 17, 2015, 11:24:47 PM
Post by: Miles on September 18, 2015, 05:19:51 AM
I like to think most people are legit hunters that work their butts off like blrman, coach, and rtspring.
Didn't Rtspring poach a two point a couple years back and lose his rifle? For some reason I seem to remember there being a thread about it somewhere. :chuckle:
As for Matt... He's from Springdale where Deer season is year round and you get respect for being an expert shot from the hours of 8:00 pm to midnight.
Post by: greenhead_killer on September 18, 2015, 05:45:48 AM
Post by: Bean Counter on September 18, 2015, 05:49:09 AM
Post by: mdbuck5x5 on September 18, 2015, 06:00:01 AM
Sad. Hopefully he can make the best of this and educate on ethics and respect for property rights.
Highly doubtful! He's been doing it for multiple years and this slap on the wrist is more than likely not gonna stop him! Hell who knows the charges and everything may have been worse, he may have taken a plea and confessed to save his ass a little.
Post by: goosegetter79 on September 18, 2015, 06:01:09 AM
Just clarification, not defending by any means. He got caught for trespassing, but still hunted in season with the proper tags? I only got through one article so far.
He also pled guilty Sep. 2nd for unlawfully obtaining a Montana resident license.
Post by: Bob33 on September 18, 2015, 06:46:04 AM
What a terrible example of hunters he is, when he could have been a role model.
Post by: h20hunter on September 18, 2015, 07:18:11 AM
http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,162801.0.html
Page 2:
Quote from: Mr Mykiss on October 31, 2014, 10:37:24 AM
There for a second I forgot you were my idol...
You havent looked very hard for an Idol if you came up with me lol :bdid:
Post by: jackelope on September 18, 2015, 08:00:58 AM
It's interesting how Matt Alwine had such an alpha presence on the Forum.
I would say he successfully cultivated a certain mystique that was attractive to weekend warriors like me. He was "the man" (or one of them) when it came to hunting, it seemed, but I guess he never really grew up. I don't care how stealthy he was or how good of a shot with a bow, he is nothing more than a poacher. A wildlife thief who turned a buck by taking us all for suckers.
And to think he can be back out there after just 4 seasons...Ugh.
John
Not sure I would characterize his "hardly ever here" presence on the forum as "alpha". Respected maybe for being a very succesful hunter with his own pretty darn cool TV show.
Too bad that's all been flushed down the tubes now.
Post by: 10thmountainarcher on September 18, 2015, 08:07:01 AM
I like to think most people are legit hunters that work their butts off like blrman, coach, and rtspring.
Didn't Rtspring poach a two point a couple years back and lose his rifle? For some reason I seem to remember there being a thread about it somewhere. :chuckle:
As for Matt... He's from Springdale where Deer season is year round and you get respect for being an expert shot from the hours of 8:00 pm to midnight.
Nope, he was accused but in court he was found not guilty if memory serves me right.
Post by: CAMPMEAT on September 18, 2015, 08:30:54 AM
Post by: CoryTDF on September 18, 2015, 08:46:56 AM
What Matt did was wrong. Dead wrong. He negated every positive message that was ever passed on through his show. Though he may not remember me I have met Matt a few times and my impressions of him were that he is bit of a narcissist. Fame and success can do that to just about anybody. The ideal personality would remain humble and make every effort to not let it go to their head. Unfortunately, most people are not able to do that. When everybody you meet tells you how amazing you are at some point you will start to believe that yourself. For all of you who feel like that would never be you..... it's easy to say that when your not in the one with the fame.
I have worked with some of the biggest names in the waterfowling industry and I have met some great guys and some guys who I detest, Chad Belding, is a prime example of a person who more than believes his own ledged. It can happen to anybody, fame brings out different parts of everybody, sometimes they are not the good parts.
I cant help but to feel that we as the audience are not part of the problem as well. We elevate these people to unrealistic levels. We treat them as hunting gods and forget that often times it really has more to do with a person having a large bank roll than skill. Anybody could kill 400 inch bulls and 165 inch whitetails if they had the right amount of money. That is what guides are for. This is no secret. This is a general statement as Matt does have skill, don't take that away from him. He just made poor choices and hopefully learned a lesson in ethics, morality, and humility. The point is that if we the viewers were happy watching "ACTUAL" hunting in which sometimes the hunter is unsuccessful the pressure would not be as high. The demand for constant success from both viewers and sponsors can quickly become overwhelming and lead to hosts making poor choices like Matt has done.
There are some VERY good hosts out there who have remained humble and who use the fact that they are famous to hold themselves to a "HIGHER" standard and that is they way it should be. As a host, if you want to believe the ledged of greatness that people create for you, you must live and hunt the way they believe you do.
:twocents:
Post by: CAMPMEAT on September 18, 2015, 08:59:03 AM
Post by: CoryTDF on September 18, 2015, 09:02:34 AM
I'm happy you mentioned the Chad Belding idiot, I cannot stand him or his shows..:chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle: :yeah:
Post by: Fl0und3rz on September 18, 2015, 09:26:13 AM
Sad. Hopefully he can make the best of this and educate on ethics and respect for property rights.
Highly doubtful! He's been doing it for multiple years and this slap on the wrist is more than likely not gonna stop him! Hell who knows the charges and everything may have been worse, he may have taken a plea and confessed to save his ass a little.
Wouldn't have guessed it... He seemed like a good dude.
:yeah:
It seems like there are many who know him better than I did. I thought maybe he could have just got caught up in the moment. It appears now that he may have gotten caught up in a lot of moments. It is sad to see such a figure be associated publicly with the noble sport of hunting, where we constantly stress the importance of ethics and abiding to laws.
At least this can be used as a negative example about what hunting in not about.
Post by: HUNTINCOUPLE on September 18, 2015, 09:29:05 AM
Post by: Gringo31 on September 18, 2015, 09:30:13 AM
http://www.nbcmontana.com/news/-Trophy-State-of-Mind-host-sentenced-for-Montana-hunting-violations/35331956
Post by: Taco280AI on September 18, 2015, 09:37:48 AM
Whatever the case is hope he can come back from this for his family's sake. Not in terms of hunting or having a show, but having a legit profession for his kids to look up to and respect. Too bad his family wasn't worth doing the right thing for, now look where he's at.
Post by: cbond3318 on September 18, 2015, 09:38:37 AM
I know that the pressure to get footage can be very intense. Every sponsor expects you to deliver. That is what they paid for. Outdoor shows can run up to $100,000 per quarter to air. I have dipped my toe in the outdoor film industry and I understand the overwhelming demand that can be placed on you from sponsors. It's funny when people have money involved they seem to forget that it is still hunting and nothing is a guarantee. All that seems to be forgotten and it comes to the point where your dreams are going to die if you do not produce.
What Matt did was wrong. Dead wrong. He negated every positive message that was ever passed on through his show. Though he may not remember me I have met Matt a few times and my impressions of him were that he is bit of a narcissist. Fame and success can do that to just about anybody. The ideal personality would remain humble and make every effort to not let it go to their head. Unfortunately, most people are not able to do that. When everybody you meet tells you how amazing you are at some point you will start to believe that yourself. For all of you who feel like that would never be you..... it's easy to say that when your not in the one with the fame.
I have worked with some of the biggest names in the waterfowling industry and I have met some great guys and some guys who I detest, Chad Belding, is a prime example of a person who more than believes his own ledged. It can happen to anybody, fame brings out different parts of everybody, sometimes they are not the good parts.
I cant help but to feel that we as the audience are not part of the problem as well. We elevate these people to unrealistic levels. We treat them as hunting gods and forget that often times it really has more to do with a person having a large bank roll than skill. Anybody could kill 400 inch bulls and 165 inch whitetails if they had the right amount of money. That is what guides are for. This is no secret. This is a general statement as Matt does have skill, don't take that away from him. He just made poor choices and hopefully learned a lesson in ethics, morality, and humility. The point is that if we the viewers were happy watching "ACTUAL" hunting in which sometimes the hunter is unsuccessful the pressure would not be as high. The demand for constant success from both viewers and sponsors can quickly become overwhelming and lead to hosts making poor choices like Matt has done.
There are some VERY good hosts out there who have remained humble and who use the fact that they are famous to hold themselves to a "HIGHER" standard and that is they way it should be. As a host, if you want to believe the ledged of greatness that people create for you, you must live and hunt the way they believe you do.
:twocents:
I agree with most of what you said here and can definitely see the point of view but would say someone to make a choice to break multiple laws while in the public spotlight and under such self imposed exposure would certainly, in my opinion, make the same decision as the average Joe behind the shroud of the everyday nobody.
Post by: h20hunter on September 18, 2015, 09:42:24 AM
Now that a guilty plea has been entered I think there is no doubt about guilty/not guilty of the charges. I've seen one sponsor go away for less than professional behavior and this far exceeds that.
Has his sponsorship been removed? Is a ban in order for this? If you think about it, for a what....$25 dollar fee to be a sponsor....you can reach around 14,000 possible clients on here. That's a lot of opportunity to sell your poaching dvds.
Post by: h2ofowlr on September 18, 2015, 09:44:23 AM
Many hard core people have a tendency to operate in the grey area. :bdid:
Post by: FWilliams on September 18, 2015, 09:59:30 AM
Post by: JimmyHoffa on September 18, 2015, 10:16:28 AM
This will be a question for the mods......I could see the ads removed/refunded. But maybe they would want to keep him on? He could do the whole don't go down the dark path and get caught up in the action like I did type post (hunting addiction anonymous?), kind of like when they would bring all the convicts to school for assembly time. Guy still has a lot of technical knowledge with archery equipment.
Now that a guilty plea has been entered I think there is no doubt about guilty/not guilty of the charges. I've seen one sponsor go away for less than professional behavior and this far exceeds that.
Has his sponsorship been removed? Is a ban in order for this? If you think about it, for a what....$25 dollar fee to be a sponsor....you can reach around 14,000 possible clients on here. That's a lot of opportunity to sell your poaching dvds.
Post by: Rainier10 on September 18, 2015, 10:39:34 AM
Post by: PA BEN on September 18, 2015, 10:42:47 AM
In addition to the fines, Alwine will be banned for four years from hunting, fishing and trapping in Montana as well as in Washington, Idaho and 41 other states that have reciprocal agreements, Murphy said.
Post by: WAcoyotehunter on September 18, 2015, 10:48:45 AM
Post by: quadrafire on September 18, 2015, 11:52:45 AM
Post by: CAMPMEAT on September 18, 2015, 12:01:29 PM
Post by: DoubleJ on September 18, 2015, 04:36:49 PM
Post by: bearpaw on September 18, 2015, 06:36:30 PM
This will be a question for the mods......
Now that a guilty plea has been entered I think there is no doubt about guilty/not guilty of the charges. I've seen one sponsor go away for less than professional behavior and this far exceeds that.
Has his sponsorship been removed? Is a ban in order for this? If you think about it, for a what....$25 dollar fee to be a sponsor....you can reach around 14,000 possible clients on here. That's a lot of opportunity to sell your poaching dvds.
He wasn't a sponsor of H-W so there is no sponsorship to remove. I have done a few shows for Matt and am very dissapointed to hear this. :bdid:
Post by: h20hunter on September 18, 2015, 06:43:23 PM
Post by: DoubleJ on September 18, 2015, 07:18:46 PM
My 13 year old son who still to this day lists "to be a hunting show host" as one of his adult occupation dreams because of his interactions with Matt, my 13 year old son who refuses to cry at anything, when I read the article to him, didn't cry but did clearly welled up a bit and simply muttered, "I thought he was one of the good guys" before getting up and walking to his room.
He is absolutely heartbroken.
Post by: h20hunter on September 18, 2015, 07:31:06 PM
Post by: BOWHUNTER45 on September 18, 2015, 07:43:12 PM
Post by: BOWHUNTER45 on September 18, 2015, 08:03:45 PM
I know that the pressure to get footage can be very intense. Every sponsor expects you to deliver. That is what they paid for. Outdoor shows can run up to $100,000 per quarter to air. I have dipped my toe in the outdoor film industry and I understand the overwhelming demand that can be placed on you from sponsors. It's funny when people have money involved they seem to forget that it is still hunting and nothing is a guarantee. All that seems to be forgotten and it comes to the point where your dreams are going to die if you do not produce.Your right ! It cost a sheet load of money to produce a T.V Show ...That's why the T.V Show guys pay big bucks to get on land where they know they can kill big animals ...That's why I do not care much for todays T.V shows ...If it was all done like Fred Bear or Larry Jones , I would be more into it ..Never was a trophy - had to brag about it kinda hunter ...That's really to bad ! We all make mistakes and hopefully he learns from it ..
What Matt did was wrong. Dead wrong. He negated every positive message that was ever passed on through his show. Though he may not remember me I have met Matt a few times and my impressions of him were that he is bit of a narcissist. Fame and success can do that to just about anybody. The ideal personality would remain humble and make every effort to not let it go to their head. Unfortunately, most people are not able to do that. When everybody you meet tells you how amazing you are at some point you will start to believe that yourself. For all of you who feel like that would never be you..... it's easy to say that when your not in the one with the fame.
I have worked with some of the biggest names in the waterfowling industry and I have met some great guys and some guys who I detest, Chad Belding, is a prime example of a person who more than believes his own ledged. It can happen to anybody, fame brings out different parts of everybody, sometimes they are not the good parts.
I cant help but to feel that we as the audience are not part of the problem as well. We elevate these people to unrealistic levels. We treat them as hunting gods and forget that often times it really has more to do with a person having a large bank roll than skill. Anybody could kill 400 inch bulls and 165 inch whitetails if they had the right amount of money. That is what guides are for. This is no secret. This is a general statement as Matt does have skill, don't take that away from him. He just made poor choices and hopefully learned a lesson in ethics, morality, and humility. The point is that if we the viewers were happy watching "ACTUAL" hunting in which sometimes the hunter is unsuccessful the pressure would not be as high. The demand for constant success from both viewers and sponsors can quickly become overwhelming and lead to hosts making poor choices like Matt has done.
There are some VERY good hosts out there who have remained humble and who use the fact that they are famous to hold themselves to a "HIGHER" standard and that is they way it should be. As a host, if you want to believe the ledged of greatness that people create for you, you must live and hunt the way they believe you do.
:twocents:
Post by: KFhunter on September 18, 2015, 08:07:39 PM
Post by: BOWHUNTER45 on September 18, 2015, 08:14:22 PM
I don't know if it's possible for a Fred Bear to exist in today's hunting climate.Ya...old Fred is probably rolling over in hid grave with all this high energy hunting ..Guys running for miles and body building and all !!! Lmao
Post by: Bob33 on September 18, 2015, 08:15:02 PM
Post by: Curly on September 18, 2015, 08:22:56 PM
Post by: CAMPMEAT on September 18, 2015, 09:05:52 PM
Post by: KFhunter on September 18, 2015, 09:12:59 PM
I hunted and haven't gotten anything either..... :'(
That's why it's called hunting(fishing) and not killing(catching) :chuckle: sorry had too.
Post by: CAMPMEAT on September 18, 2015, 09:18:01 PM
I hunted and haven't gotten anything either..... :'(
That's why it's called hunting(fishing) and not killing(catching) :chuckle: sorry had too.
I've never caught anything hunting....
Post by: 2labs on September 18, 2015, 09:27:38 PM
Post by: Bob33 on September 18, 2015, 11:09:47 PM
Post by: lokidog on September 19, 2015, 08:44:55 AM
I hunted and haven't gotten anything either..... :'(
That's why it's called hunting(fishing) and not killing(catching) :chuckle: sorry had too.
I've never caught anything hunting....
I caught a cold once.... :rolleyes:
Post by: grundy53 on September 19, 2015, 08:53:34 AM
Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk
Post by: popeshawnpaul on September 19, 2015, 08:57:16 AM
Post by: trophyhunt on September 19, 2015, 09:10:17 AM
What he did was wrong and it was for greed/fame. He got the attention he wanted with these animals and now he's getting the attention he deserves for the offenses. I think most feel deceived and that's where a lot of the emotion comes from. To put it in reality, it sounds like he lied on his hunting application to save some money on non-resident fees and went on someone else's land without permission. I'm certain at least half of you have done the latter. Nobody was hurt, raped, or harmed. It's simple once you get past your emotions.good point, pretty disappointing either way. It would be certainly worse had he killed animals out of season and/or used weapons that were not open. I bet he feels like an azz.
Post by: Fl0und3rz on September 19, 2015, 09:39:06 AM
and went on someone else's land without permission. I'm certain at least half of you have done the latter.
Certain?
Post by: Bean Counter on September 19, 2015, 10:01:37 AM
Post by: Fl0und3rz on September 19, 2015, 10:05:22 AM
Post by: Bean Counter on September 19, 2015, 10:07:29 AM
Post by: Bob33 on September 19, 2015, 10:08:14 AM
Nobody was hurt, raped, or harmed. It's simple once you get past your emotions.Not physically, but anyone who wonders what the acts of one hunter can do to the image of hunting, say the word "Cecil".
Post by: BOWHUNTER45 on September 19, 2015, 10:19:38 AM
Post by: PA BEN on September 19, 2015, 10:32:47 AM
sentenced Wednesday for hunting violations which occurred on private property in the Crazy Mountains east of Clyde Park from 2010 to 2014.
Most if not all poachers who got busted say they were poachers. :twocents:
Post by: 3nails on September 19, 2015, 10:54:14 AM
Correct me if I'm wrong but the topic says "POACHING". Unless it was shot at night or closed season it is a hunting violation. I read the articles and don't see poaching mentioned anywhere. I would think he would be more of a low life if it was truly poaching.In my view, having an illegal tag and harvesting an animal with it IS poaching.
sentenced Wednesday for hunting violations which occurred on private property in the Crazy Mountains east of Clyde Park from 2010 to 2014.
Most if not all poachers who got busted say they were poachers. :twocents:
Post by: Bob33 on September 19, 2015, 11:57:55 AM
Correct me if I'm wrong but the topic says "POACHING". Unless it was shot at night or closed season it is a hunting violation. I read the articles and don't see poaching mentioned anywhere. I would think he would be more of a low life if it was truly poaching.There is no legal definition of "poaching" in Washington state or Montana law. Most would consider taking an animal illegally as poaching, but it is subject to individual interpretation.
sentenced Wednesday for hunting violations which occurred on private property in the Crazy Mountains east of Clyde Park from 2010 to 2014.
Most if not all poachers who got busted say they were poachers. :twocents:
Post by: Bean Counter on September 19, 2015, 12:24:45 PM
No sense in holding it against him ....Everyone deserves forgiveness !!! Very unfortunate for Matt but I know we have a lot of perfect hunters on here but I am sure there are a few who are not so perfect ...Including me !!!! Just the way it goes sometimes when you are put in the pot !
If everyone deserves forgiveness, was there really an offense in the first place?
Judgement is about justice. Restoring the balance by making society or an individual victim whole again. Grace, on the other hand, is about getting what we DON'T deserve, which is forgiveness.
Just some reflections from this wretched, filthy rag who has been saved by body piercing. :hello:
(https://hunting-washington.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fres5ekt.com%2F4fun-funny-obrazky%2Ffiles%2Fbody-piercing-saved-my-life.gif&hash=cc003012d06aee5bdceff289cbef8a4742ae971c)
Post by: PA BEN on September 19, 2015, 01:51:27 PM
:yeah:No sense in holding it against him ....Everyone deserves forgiveness !!! Very unfortunate for Matt but I know we have a lot of perfect hunters on here but I am sure there are a few who are not so perfect ...Including me !!!! Just the way it goes sometimes when you are put in the pot !
If everyone deserves forgiveness, was there really an offense in the first place?
Judgement is about justice. Restoring the balance by making society or an individual victim whole again. Grace, on the other hand, is about getting what we DON'T deserve, which is forgiveness.
Just some reflections from this wretched, filthy rag who has been saved by body piercing. :hello:
(https://hunting-washington.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fres5ekt.com%2F4fun-funny-obrazky%2Ffiles%2Fbody-piercing-saved-my-life.gif&hash=cc003012d06aee5bdceff289cbef8a4742ae971c)
Post by: h20hunter on September 19, 2015, 02:41:02 PM
Post by: Mark251 on September 19, 2015, 03:56:48 PM
Post by: Machias on September 20, 2015, 06:08:34 PM
Post by: trophyhunt on September 20, 2015, 06:23:07 PM
If you are making a product, like Matt was with Trophy State if Mind, and selling yourself to advertisers and dvds to the public you are held to the highest of standards. No room for error. No, most of us are not perfect but if you are in the public eye you beyter make sure you are straight as an arrow.I also agree with this very much, good point as well.
Post by: BOWHUNTER45 on September 20, 2015, 07:01:20 PM
Correct me if I'm wrong but the topic says "POACHING". Unless it was shot at night or closed season it is a hunting violation. I read the articles and don't see poaching mentioned anywhere. I would think he would be more of a low life if it was truly poaching.This has been bothering me too ! What is poaching to them ...obviously different than I see poaching ...Poaching and Trespassing is 2 different things ...or am I wrong ?
sentenced Wednesday for hunting violations which occurred on private property in the Crazy Mountains east of Clyde Park from 2010 to 2014.
Most if not all poachers who got busted say they were poachers. :twocents:
Post by: j_h_nimrod on September 20, 2015, 08:05:00 PM
Post by: ribka on September 20, 2015, 08:13:33 PM
All this false celebrity worship commonplace in our society. You'll find plenty of people you know personally ate much better role models ( hint your parents, friends, coaches) than the hunting society Kardashians
Hold up.
Wait a minute.
>:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:(
OUR MATT ALWINE!
"the Matt Alwine" that I have purchased at least one DVD of?
:yike: :yike: :yike: :yike: :yike: :yike:
C'mon Matt.........say it ain't so!
what
the
HECK!
Post by: ribka on September 20, 2015, 08:20:17 PM
Just clarification, not defending by any means. He got caught for trespassing, but still hunted in season with the proper tags? I only got through one article so far.
Sounds like an innocent misunderstanding then
You can still continue to purchase his poaching videos :tup:
Post by: ribka on September 20, 2015, 08:22:24 PM
Just clarification, not defending by any means. He got caught for trespassing, but still hunted in season with the proper tags? I only got through one article so far.
He also pled guilty Sep. 2nd for unlawfully obtaining a Montana resident license.
Am sure an purely innocent misunderstanding of MT regs. The fans can keep buying his wares :tup:
Post by: ribka on September 20, 2015, 08:26:41 PM
Antler crazy..... I HATE that portion of the hunting community
Amen
Post by: CAMPMEAT on September 20, 2015, 08:27:44 PM
Just clarification, not defending by any means. He got caught for trespassing, but still hunted in season with the proper tags? I only got through one article so far.
Sounds like an innocent misunderstanding then
You can still continue to purchase his poaching videos :tup:
Buying his videos will help pay his fines too..... :chuckle:
Post by: ribka on September 20, 2015, 08:32:53 PM
What he did was wrong and it was for greed/fame. He got the attention he wanted with these animals and now he's getting the attention he deserves for the offenses. I think most feel deceived and that's where a lot of the emotion comes from. To put it in reality, it sounds like he lied on his hunting application to save some money on non-resident fees and went on someone else's land without permission. I'm certain at least half of you have done the latter. Nobody was hurt, raped, or harmed. It's simple once you get past your emotions.Really?
I believe you are an attorney
One has has to swear out residency when applying for a tag. Are you supporting lying on an affidavit as an attorney? WTF?
Sounds like we shouLd should give tv hosts who lie and trespass ( poach) a second chance then.
OMG counselor. :bash: I guess ethics have no place in today's modern hunting culture.
Post by: ribka on September 20, 2015, 08:35:21 PM
Correct me if I'm wrong but the topic says "POACHING". Unless it was shot at night or closed season it is a hunting violation. I read the articles and don't see poaching mentioned anywhere. I would think he would be more of a low life if it was truly poaching.
sentenced Wednesday for hunting violations which occurred on private property in the Crazy Mountains east of Clyde Park from 2010 to 2014.
Most if not all poachers who got busted say they were poachers. :twocents:
Thank you
The number of unethical hunters justifying his actions is is really sad.
Post by: ribka on September 20, 2015, 08:45:25 PM
No sense in holding it against him ....Everyone deserves forgiveness !!! Very unfortunate for Matt but I know we have a lot of perfect hunters on here but I am sure there are a few who are not so perfect ...Including me !!!! Just the way it goes sometimes when you are put in the pot !I heard English was not matts first language so he he had a difficult time understanding M T regs. I understand his mistake now. Plus he could not read the " no trespassing signs" in English in Montana. I fore give him. .
Thinking next year 2016 me and my buddies will film our elk hunts in YNP of trophy elk in end of AUG Rut with rifles. Well call our show " super star state of mind" well pay European and Asain tourists to film our hunts.
As a bonus hunt well shoot a few trophy bison too off the road
Pre order for $29.99 and buy my signature elk/ trophy bison Nikon trophy scope for $ 1149.50 and my signature trophy scent blocker butt out YNP hunting green national park service camo u iforms clothes for $510
Pm me your checks
Thanks and JC forgives me :tup:
:tup:
Post by: JDHasty on September 20, 2015, 08:52:31 PM
I don't have a television, so I don't watch these hunting shows often. I see them at friend's homes from time to time and find most of them pretty pathetic.
I have no idea whether I have ever seen this particular show or not.
It is disturbing to me to see how many people who post here are defending this guy's actions.
Post by: greenhead_killer on September 20, 2015, 08:57:22 PM
Nice try. I don't defend him and I will not promote him. Take your pompous response somewhere else. I'll bet at least 60% of the hunt wa community has done something in their hunting career that was questionable or unethical. I hope they stick it to him just as they would anyone else. To sit back on your keyboard and act as if you're Gods gift to the world on this, it's sad, but not the end of the world. Let's keep perspective people. Look at that Cambodian guy that was trafficking wild meat last year. I didn't see this same outcry from our community on that one. It's only because he had a name that any of you are even jumping on this. Disappointing, yes. End of the world, not a chance. Home dude will be burned for so long id be surprised to see his face again.Just clarification, not defending by any means. He got caught for trespassing, but still hunted in season with the proper tags? I only got through one article so far.
Sounds like an innocent misunderstanding then
You can still continue to purchase his poaching videos :tup:
Post by: heronblu on September 20, 2015, 09:02:31 PM
Post by: ribka on September 20, 2015, 09:13:17 PM
I hunt by the crazy mountains in Montana and have had monster bucks just over the fence line on property I cannot hunt. I of course passed. I do not have a hunting show and did not poach and trespass and lie on hunting applications.
You can keep worshipping a poacher I choose not too in fact I never worshipped or looked up to his type of antler whore.
Nice try. I don't defend him and I will not promote him. Take your pompous response somewhere else. I'll bet at least 60% of the hunt wa community has done something in their hunting career that was questionable or unethical. I hope they stick it to him just as they would anyone else. To sit back on your keyboard and act as if you're Gods gift to the world on this, it's sad, but not the end of the world. Let's keep perspective people. Look at that Cambodian guy that was trafficking wild meat last year. I didn't see this same outcry from our community on that one. It's only because he had a name that any of you are even jumping on this. Disappointing, yes. End of the world, not a chance. Home dude will be burned for so long id be surprised to see his face again.Just clarification, not defending by any means. He got caught for trespassing, but still hunted in season with the proper tags? I only got through one article so far.
Sounds like an innocent misunderstanding then
You can still continue to purchase his poaching videos :tup:
Post by: greenhead_killer on September 20, 2015, 09:20:07 PM
So because Matt poaches and lies and commits fraud on hunting applications multiple time times all hunters MUST do the same? HE LIED on his MT residency DUDE !Pretty sure I've never mentioned 'worshipping' or promoting the dude as you claim. What i am saying is I bet most guys have committed a crime whether(?) they knew it or not. Pretty sure home dude knew he was skirting the rules and deserves the following punishment. I'm glad mt dealt with it the way they did. Id like to
I hunt by the crazy mountains in Montana and have had monster bucks just over the fence line on property I cannot hunt. I of course passed. I do not have a hunting show and did not poach and trespass and lie on hunting applications.
You can keep worshipping a poacher I choose not too in fact I never worshipped or looked up to his type of antler *censored*.Nice try. I don't defend him and I will not promote him. Take your pompous response somewhere else. I'll bet at least 60% of the hunt wa community has done something in their hunting career that was questionable or unethical. I hope they stick it to him just as they would anyone else. To sit back on your keyboard and act as if you're Gods gift to the world on this, it's sad, but not the end of the world. Let's keep perspective people. Look at that Cambodian guy that was trafficking wild meat last year. I didn't see this same outcry from our community on that one. It's only because he had a name that any of you are even jumping on this. Disappointing, yes. End of the world, not a chance. Home dude will be burned for so long id be surprised to see his face again.Just clarification, not defending by any means. He got caught for trespassing, but still hunted in season with the proper tags? I only got through one article so far.
Sounds like an innocent misunderstanding then
You can still continue to purchase his poaching videos :tup:
See wa be as determined to deter people from commiting wildlife crimes as mt appears to be. And I never claimed everyone does the same. But I bet everyone has done something that could be called out too. I think the only reaso. For the the out cry is that he was a visible spokesman for the idea(hunting) that we all Support and enjoy doing.
Post by: Dan-o on September 20, 2015, 09:43:02 PM
Correct me if I'm wrong but the topic says "POACHING". Unless it was shot at night or closed season it is a hunting violation. I read the articles and don't see poaching mentioned anywhere. I would think he would be more of a low life if it was truly poaching.
sentenced Wednesday for hunting violations which occurred on private property in the Crazy Mountains east of Clyde Park from 2010 to 2014.
Most if not all poachers who got busted say they were poachers. :twocents:
Thank you
The number of unethical hunters justifying his actions is is really sad.
Who is justifying unethical actions? :dunno: :dunno:
Post by: ribka on September 20, 2015, 10:11:07 PM
What he did was wrong and it was for greed/fame. He got the attention he wanted with these animals and now he's getting the attention he deserves for the offenses. I think most feel deceived and that's where a lot of the emotion comes from. To put it in reality, it sounds like he lied on his hunting application to save some money on non-resident fees and went on someone else's land without permission. I'm certain at least half of you have done the latter. Nobody was hurt, raped, or harmed. It's simple once you get past your emotions.
Read thelast 2 sentences At half the hunters on hunt WA have done the same.
plus this guy:
I'll bet at least 60% of the hunt wa community has done something in their hunting career that was questionable or unethical.
No big deal
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on September 20, 2015, 10:13:02 PM
What he did was wrong and it was for greed/fame. He got the attention he wanted with these animals and now he's getting the attention he deserves for the offenses. I think most feel deceived and that's where a lot of the emotion comes from. To put it in reality, it sounds like he lied on his hunting application to save some money on non-resident fees and went on someone else's land without permission. I'm certain at least half of you have done the latter. Nobody was hurt, raped, or harmed. It's simple once you get past your emotions.
Read thelast 2 sentences At half the hunters on hunt WA have done the same.
No big deal
Nope I NEVER DONE EITHER OF THOSE THINGS!
Post by: Dan-o on September 20, 2015, 10:17:16 PM
What he did was wrong and it was for greed/fame. He got the attention he wanted with these animals and now he's getting the attention he deserves for the offenses. I think most feel deceived and that's where a lot of the emotion comes from. To put it in reality, it sounds like he lied on his hunting application to save some money on non-resident fees and went on someone else's land without permission. I'm certain at least half of you have done the latter. Nobody was hurt, raped, or harmed. It's simple once you get past your emotions.
Read thelast 2 sentences At half the hunters on hunt WA have done the same.
No big deal
Got it, thanks.
Post by: ribka on September 20, 2015, 10:17:36 PM
Every hunter on here does not have a hunting show viewed by the public.
I gues justification is is, based on these two posts, is all hunters are unethical, so it is ok that alwine knowingly broke the Montana fish and game laws and poached
IT is a big deal to falsely claim residency in Montana and claim tags that non residents, LIKE US, cannot access. But again am sure it it was a simple honest mistake committed by Alwine year after year to make money. We ALL do it here on Hunt WA :dunno:
So because Matt poaches and lies and commits fraud on hunting applications multiple time times all hunters MUST do the same? HE LIED on his MT residency DUDE !Pretty sure I've never mentioned 'worshipping' or promoting the dude as you claim. What i am saying is I bet most guys have committed a crime whether(?) they knew it or not. Pretty sure home dude knew he was skirting the rules and deserves the following punishment. I'm glad mt dealt with it the way they did. Id like to
I hunt by the crazy mountains in Montana and have had monster bucks just over the fence line on property I cannot hunt. I of course passed. I do not have a hunting show and did not poach and trespass and lie on hunting applications.
You can keep worshipping a poacher I choose not too in fact I never worshipped or looked up to his type of antler *censored*.Nice try. I don't defend him and I will not promote him. Take your pompous response somewhere else. I'll bet at least 60% of the hunt wa community has done something in their hunting career that was questionable or unethical. I hope they stick it to him just as they would anyone else. To sit back on your keyboard and act as if you're Gods gift to the world on this, it's sad, but not the end of the world. Let's keep perspective people. Look at that Cambodian guy that was trafficking wild meat last year. I didn't see this same outcry from our community on that one. It's only because he had a name that any of you are even jumping on this. Disappointing, yes. End of the world, not a chance. Home dude will be burned for so long id be surprised to see his face again.Just clarification, not defending by any means. He got caught for trespassing, but still hunted in season with the proper tags? I only got through one article so far.
Sounds like an innocent misunderstanding then
You can still continue to purchase his poaching videos :tup:
See wa be as determined to deter people from commiting wildlife crimes as mt appears to be. And I never claimed everyone does the same. But I bet everyone has done something that could be called out too. I think the only reaso. For the the out cry is that he was a visible spokesman for the idea(hunting) that we all Support and enjoy doing.
Post by: greenhead_killer on September 21, 2015, 04:09:37 AM
Post by: rasbo on September 21, 2015, 04:40:59 AM
Greed for animals, money, and fame got the better of him.this nails it for me..
What a terrible example of hunters he is, when he could have been a role model.
Post by: boneaddict on September 21, 2015, 04:53:48 AM
Post by: Machias on September 21, 2015, 06:01:43 AM
Post by: PolarBear on September 21, 2015, 06:19:16 AM
Post by: FWilliams on September 21, 2015, 06:53:12 AM
Post by: pianoman9701 on September 21, 2015, 07:10:26 AM
What he did was wrong and it was for greed/fame. He got the attention he wanted with these animals and now he's getting the attention he deserves for the offenses. I think most feel deceived and that's where a lot of the emotion comes from. To put it in reality, it sounds like he lied on his hunting application to save some money on non-resident fees and went on someone else's land without permission. I'm certain at least half of you have done the latter. Nobody was hurt, raped, or harmed. It's simple once you get past your emotions.
I would be extremely surprised if the number were anywhere close to half. I know no one who's lied to pay resident prices out of state. I know few who trespass. If someone i hunt with does, I don't hunt with them any longer. As far as a definition of poaching is concerned, he defines it with his actions:
poach1
[pohch]
Spell Syllables
Examples Word Origin
verb (used without object)
1.
to trespass, especially on another's game preserve, in order to steal animals or to hunt.
2.
to take game or fish illegally.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/poach
Post by: DOUBLELUNG on September 21, 2015, 10:37:11 AM
Post by: pianoman9701 on September 21, 2015, 10:45:58 AM
Post by: Bob33 on September 21, 2015, 10:56:02 AM
This is from May, but it’s another interesting hit on Washington hunters. If you’re going to be stupid enough to break game laws, don’t do it in Montana or Alaska. They don’t mess around.
http://www.greatfallstribune.com/story/news/local/2015/05/15/washington-men-stripped-montana-hunting-privileges/27408733/
Post by: jackelope on September 21, 2015, 11:40:28 AM
It’s difficult if not impossible to know what percentage of the hunting population poaches. I have read that many non-hunters believe it is a majority of hunters that do. As is true in these instances, the public only sees the bad incidents like Matthew Alwine’s illegal activities.
This is from May, but it’s another interesting hit on Washington hunters. If you’re going to be stupid enough to break game laws,don’tplease do it in Montana or Alaska. They don’t mess around.
http://www.greatfallstribune.com/story/news/local/2015/05/15/washington-men-stripped-montana-hunting-privileges/27408733/
Fixed it for you.
:chuckle:
Post by: Bob33 on September 21, 2015, 11:41:46 AM
Thanks. ;)It’s difficult if not impossible to know what percentage of the hunting population poaches. I have read that many non-hunters believe it is a majority of hunters that do. As is true in these instances, the public only sees the bad incidents like Matthew Alwine’s illegal activities.
This is from May, but it’s another interesting hit on Washington hunters. If you’re going to be stupid enough to break game laws,don’tplease do it in Montana or Alaska. They don’t mess around.
http://www.greatfallstribune.com/story/news/local/2015/05/15/washington-men-stripped-montana-hunting-privileges/27408733/
Fixed it for you.
:chuckle:
I'll also add that if you wish to poach in Washington, please contact me. I pay cash to observe.
Post by: Fl0und3rz on September 21, 2015, 11:55:22 AM
Thanks. ;)It’s difficult if not impossible to know what percentage of the hunting population poaches. I have read that many non-hunters believe it is a majority of hunters that do. As is true in these instances, the public only sees the bad incidents like Matthew Alwine’s illegal activities.
This is from May, but it’s another interesting hit on Washington hunters. If you’re going to be stupid enough to break game laws,don’tplease do it in Montana or Alaska. They don’t mess around.
http://www.greatfallstribune.com/story/news/local/2015/05/15/washington-men-stripped-montana-hunting-privileges/27408733/
Fixed it for you.
:chuckle:
I'll also add that if you wish to poach in Washington, please contact me. I pay cash to observe.
Conspiracy to commit poachery? Can I get 20 points for a double?
Post by: Jonnyjammer on September 21, 2015, 12:02:00 PM
Post by: pianoman9701 on September 21, 2015, 12:45:44 PM
Post by: Jonnyjammer on September 21, 2015, 12:48:28 PM
Post by: JDHasty on September 21, 2015, 12:52:34 PM
Of the guys trying to make a living by killing trophy class big game in USA, the 98% that are lawbreakers give all the rest of them a bad name.
I have to say that you have just pretty much put into words what my thoughts are regarding this topic. I have not seen all of the shows, or even a lot of the shows, but what I have seen did not leave me wanting to ever see another one. I don't have a television, but I do see these shows from time to time when visiting others and they have frequently made a less than stellar impression on me.
Post by: pianoman9701 on September 21, 2015, 12:53:11 PM
I dont know and not being a smarty pants but what would you consider trade.I consider anything you make money on in any way to be trade,therefore all of the trade made from these hunts should be under the lacey act.
It doesn't matter what I consider trade. I'd like to see a Lacey Act charge on this. But the fact is that the whole point of Lacey was to take away the incentive for people to sell wild game meat and parts, which was a leading cause of the destruction of herds and was endangering species. The act is pretty specific in targeting trade in wild game across state borders. There could well be other laws which apply, but I don't think Lacey is one of them. I only play a lawyer on the internet, so it might apply. :dunno:
Post by: JDHasty on September 21, 2015, 12:55:28 PM
I dont know and not being a smarty pants but what would you consider trade.I consider anything you make money on in any way to be trade,therefore all of the trade made from these hunts should be under the lacey act.
I would say I am inclined to believe that selling the videos should satisfy the law, but I am not a lawyer and I also do not even have enough knowledge of the Lacey Act itself to even give an informed opinion.
Post by: Jonnyjammer on September 21, 2015, 12:56:05 PM
Post by: Curly on September 21, 2015, 01:06:35 PM
Quote
Clark W. Dixon, 41, a host of the show, was charged with a felony violation of the federal Lacey Act. The charge against him alleges he "knowingly" violated the federal wildlife law, Assistant U.S. Attorney Steve Skrocki said. The felony charge is punishable by a maximum of five years in jail and a $250,000 fine.
The other charges allege eight people who appeared on the show committed misdemeanor Lacey Act violations. The misdemeanor charge is based on the lesser "negligence" standard that they "knew or should have known" they were breaking the law, Skrocki said.
The hunters are accused of violating a provision of the Lacey Act that makes it illegal from someone to "transport in interstate commerce, any wildlife taken in violation of any law or regulation of any state."
Quote
Prosecutors have been investigating the show's participants for Lacey Act violations for years, Skrocki said. The investigation became overt, with the use of search warrants and interviews, last summer.
"Information was trickling in over several years," he said. "I can't go into details, but at some point in the investigative timeline we obtained a break which we then used to further our investigation and obtain search warrants and the like."
Post by: Fl0und3rz on September 21, 2015, 01:08:52 PM
I dont know and not being a smarty pants but what would you consider trade.I consider anything you make money on in any way to be trade,therefore all of the trade made from these hunts should be under the lacey act.
It doesn't matter what I consider trade. I'd like to see a Lacey Act charge on this. But the fact is that the whole point of Lacey was to take away the incentive for people to sell wild game meat and parts, which was a leading cause of the destruction of herds and was endangering species. The act is pretty specific in targeting trade in wild game across state borders. There could well be other laws which apply, but I don't think Lacey is one of them. I only play a lawyer on the internet, so it might apply. :dunno:
The AK guys (on another thread here) were charged with Lacey Act violations. It seems a pretty similar set of circumstances, but I am not familiar with the nuances of Lacey Act jurisprudence.
http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/wireStory/hunting-show-host-charged-poaching-alaska-33757764
The above is the one Curly is noting. This is the Alwine/TSoM case.
Post by: JimmyHoffa on September 21, 2015, 01:09:50 PM
Post by: ribka on September 21, 2015, 01:16:37 PM
Post by: pianoman9701 on September 21, 2015, 01:49:48 PM
2. The Lacey Act
The Lacey Act occupies a central position within this legal framework for three reasons. First, it applies to a wider array of wildlife, fish, and plants than does any other single wildlife protection law. Second, it provides for a longer potential term of incarceration than do most other wildlife laws containing felony provisions. Third, the scope of the acts it prohibits is broader than most other wildlife laws.
As a result, the Lacey Act is frequently used: More than 700 Lacey Act criminal counts were filed in U.S. federal courts during fiscal years 1993 and 1994. [FN53] These charges resulted in approximately 315 months of incarceration and the imposition of criminal fines and costs amounting to more than $1 million, along with many civil fines and forfeitures of property and wildlife. [FN54]
II. HISTORY AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE LACEY ACT
A. Original Passage in 1900
Iowa Congressman John Lacey first introduced the Lacey Act to the House of Representatives in the spring of 1900. [FN55] He intended the law to "enlarge the powers of the Department of Agriculture," [FN56] and gave it three primary purposes: (1) to authorize the introduction and preservation of game, song, and insectivorous wild birds, (2) to prevent the "unwise" introduction of foreign birds and animals, and (3) to supplement state laws for the protection of game and birds. [FN57] Although its coverage extended to animals, the Lacey Act was essentially a bird preservation and restoration measure designed to enhance and protect agriculture. Its language reflected Rep. Lacey's personal passion for the preservation of agriculturally beneficial birds and the eradication of harmful exotic species.
In comments on the House floor, Congressman Lacey told his colleagues about the agricultural damage that had accompanied the decline in bird populations. [FN58] He cited numerous examples of wildlife problems of the time: the extinction of the carrier pigeon, the serious depletion of grouse, prairie chicken, and buffalo populations, and the problems created by foreign species such as the English sparrow and the French pink flower. [FN59] Lacey listed the primary threats to bird populations as excessive hunting of game birds by market hunters, the introduction of harmful exotic species that displaced native populations, and the millinery industry, which at that time consumed millions of birds each year for the production of ladies' hats. [FN60]
Lacey's law authorized the Department of Agriculture to assist with the reintroduction of game birds and other wild birds where they had become locally scarce or extinct. [FN61] It prohibited the importation of the mongoose, fruit bat (then also known as "flying foxes"), English sparrow, starling, and any other animal designated "injurious" by the Department of Agriculture, [FN62] and required permits for most other wildlife imports. [FN63]
The original Lacey Act also addressed game poaching and wildlife "laundering," which had been fostered by limitations on state control over merchandise traveling in interstate commerce. Lacey illustrated these problems by describing two common scenarios to his colleagues in Congress. [FN64] First, it was common at that time for large numbers of game to be killed by poachers (known as market hunters or "pothunters" [FN65]) in one state, fraudulently mismarked to avoid detection, and shipped to another state for sale to the public. Once the pothunter had removed the game from its state of origin, that state lacked the jurisdiction necessary to prosecute him. When the unlawfully killed game entered a second state, the laws of that state were often unable to prohibit its sale, as all power to regulate interstate commerce was vested in the federal government. [FN66]
A second common problem involved local game killed during a state's closed season and sold under the guise of having been brought into the state from elsewhere. Lacey spoke of game sellers in New York who would hang a few verifiably imported Scottish grouse in their store windows and use them as a "fence" for the sale of illegally taken local grouse, which were apparently indistinguishable from the Scottish specimens. [FN67] Restrictions on state control over items traveling in interstate commerce frequently prevented a state from simply prohibiting the sale of all game during its closed season. [FN68]
The inability of state laws to address these scenarios stemmed from two legal doctrines considered valid at the time. Under the state ownership doctrine, states were considered to own the wildlife found within their borders and had the exclusive power to restrict the export of such wildlife. This doctrine, which began to percolate through Supreme Court case law in 1842, [FN69] was enunciated in the 1896 holding of Geer v. Connecticut. [FN70] The Geer Court was asked to determine the extent of a state's ability to control the transport of game killed lawfully within its borders. In its holding, the Court proclaimed that each state owns the wildlife within its borders in trust for the state's citizens, and has the right to control the taking and disposition of game in order to ensure conservation of a valuable food supply so long as such control has only an incidental effect on interstate commerce. [FN71]
Steady erosion of the state ownership doctrine finally resulted in the Supreme Court's complete rejection of the concept eighty-one years after Geer in Hughes v. Oklahoma. [FN72] Hughes was factually similar to Geer in that the Court was asked to consider whether Oklahoma's prohibitions on the export of native wild-caught minnows was permissible. Characterizing the idea of absolute state control over wildlife within its borders as a "19th century legal fiction," [FN73] the Court declared that constitutional challenges to state wildlife control laws henceforth would be analyzed according to the same general rules that applied to state regulation of other resources. [FN74]
The second doctrine that prevented direct state regulation of imported wildlife prior to the Lacey Act arose from a series of judicial decisions strictly construing the Commerce Clause to preclude state control over virtually any item that traveled in interstate commerce. [FN75] In 1897, for example, the Supreme Court declared that because liquor was a lawful item of interstate commerce, states could not control its importation or sale within their borders. [FN76] In another case of that period, the Court ruled that, despite a state's undisputed power to protect the health of its citizens, a state law placing restrictions on imported oleomargarine was invalid because it restricted interstate commerce. [FN77]
In 1900, with the state ownership doctrine still firmly in place, Lacey could not have proposed legislation placing the country's wildlife directly under the control of a federal agency. As Lacey explained to opponents on the House floor, his bill was not intended to be a "national game law, which, I think, would be unconstitutional," [FN78] but was intended only to augment state laws. He noted that "the authority of the National Government begins where the State authority ends." [FN79]
Lacey's law addressed the problems of market hunting, concealed interstate shipments, and game laundering in three ways. First, the Act criminalized both the delivery for shipment and the shipment of parts or bodies of "wild animals or birds" killed in violation of state law. [FN80] Second, relying on the Commerce Clause power, the Act required all interstate shipments of wildlife to be clearly marked and labeled. [FN81] Violation of these sections was a strict liability offense for the shipper of the game, while the "consignee" and "carrier" had to know the shipment was mismarked for criminal penalties against them to ensue. [FN82] If convicted, the maximum penalty for the shipper, the consignee, and the carrier was a $200 fine. [FN83] Third, rather than attempting to place "state-owned" wildife under direct federal control, the Act removed federal restrictions on the states' ability to regulate the sale of wildlife within their borders by subjecting all game animals and birds entering a state to the state's laws. [FN84] The language of this section was borrowed from an earlier federal statute that allowed "dry" states to regulate the possession and sale of liquor entering or passing through their jurisdictions. [FN85]
B. Early Litigation
The initial impact of the Lacey Act on state regulation of imported wildlife was somewhat mixed. In some early cases, prior interpretations of state law were held to withstand the apparently broadening power of the Lacey Act. In People v. Bootman , [FN86] for example, the state of New York had initially sought penalties exceeding $1 million against a defendant who possessed more than 47,000 imported game birds during New York's closed season. [FN87] At that time, a state law prohibited possession of game birds during the closed season regardless of their origin. [FN88] The defendant claimed that the relevant provisions of the state law, enacted prior to the Lacey Act , did not apply to wildlife killed in another state and transported into New York. [FN89] The New York court reluctantly agreed, stating that the recently enacted Lacey Act could have no effect on the interpretation of a pre-existing state law. [FN90] It added, however, that subsequent enlargement of the state law's provisions to explicitly prohibit possession of imported game during the closed season would likely require a different result in future cases. [FN91]
In other cases the Lacey Act was acknowledged, but was not relied upon. For example, in State v. Shattuck, [FN92] diners at a Minneapolis restaurant in December 1904 ordered and were served ruffed grouse. [FN93] The grouse had been killed in Wisconsin and imported to Minnesota, which prohibited the sale of ruffed grouse regardless of its origin. [FN94] The defendant restaurateur argued against application of the law to his grouse, claiming both a due process violation (the taking of his personal property) and an unconstitutional infringement on interstate commerce. [FN95] Reasoning that the exclusion of non-native game would be necessary to prevent fraudulent evasion of the state law (echoing Lacey's arguments on the floor of the House), and concluding that all wildlife within a state is property of the state, the Shattuck court held that the police power of the state allows regulation of wildlife without running afoul of constitutional issues. [FN96] Almost as an aside, the court noted that the newly enacted Lacey Act "eliminates all questions" regarding improper infringements on interstate commerce. [FN97]
In similar fashion, the Supreme Court addressed the authority of state laws over imported wildlife in a 1908 case that merely referred to the Lacey Act . [FN98] In New York ex rel. Silz v. Hesterberg, amendments to New York's game law, prohibiting the possession of imported game during the state's closed season, were challenged as unconstitutional takings of private property without due process and improper infringements of federal control over interstate commerce. [FN99] The Supreme Court rejected these arguments, approving the state law as a valid exercise of police power over state property with only an incidental effect on interstate commerce, and as necessary for the preservation of the game supply which, "in spite of laws passed for its protection, is rapidly disappearing from many portions of the country." [FN100] Having decided the issues on these grounds, the Court deemed it unnecessary to examine the Lacey Act's provisions. [FN101]
Other early courts relied directly on the Lacey Act in situations involving interstate shipments of wildlife. For example, in Cohen v. Gould, [FN102] 680 muskrat skins were shipped to Minnesota from Wisconsin, in violation of a Minnesota law prohibiting the possession of wildlife killed in violation of another state's laws. [FN103] The defendant argued that the Minnesota law interfered with interstate commerce. The state supreme court considered this issue only briefly, stating only that "it seems to be disposed of by an act of Congress the purpose of which is to prevent interstate commerce in furs which will aid the violation of state law for the conservation of wild life." [FN104] In People v. Fargo, [FN105] the question was whether the Lacey Act authorized state regulation of wildlife entering a state in the possession of a common carrier prior to its receipt by a consignee. [FN106] In Fargo, the president of the American Express Company was charged with violating a New York law prohibiting the transport of deer carcasses within the state during certain times of the year. [FN107] The carrier argued that the state law should not apply until the deer were delivered to a consignee. [FN108] The court agreed, noting that the Lacey Act gave effect to state laws "upon arrival" of the wildlife within the state, and that this language had been construed in analogous Wilson Act cases to restrict state regulation of liquor shipments that had not yet been transferred from a common carrier to a consignee within the state. [FN109]
The first direct interpretation of the Lacey Act came in 1910, when the Eighth Circuit was asked to consider procedural and constitutional challenges to four Lacey Act convictions of Paris Rupert , who attempted to ship dead quail in interstate commerce. [FN110] The Oklahoma territorial law at issue allowed the killing of quail between certain dates, but prohibited the export of quail from the territory at any time. [FN111] Although Rupert's quail were apparently killed during the open season, [FN112] Rupert was charged and convicted on two Lacey Act counts alleging the quail [FN113] had been killed illegally because they were killed "with the intent and for the purpose of being shipped and transported out of the territory" in violation of the territorial law. [FN114] Rupert was also convicted of two additional Lacey Act charges alleging his failure to clearly mark the boxes containing the quail. [FN115]
The Eighth Circuit first analyzed the language of the indictments to determine if they properly charged Lacey Act violations. The court reasoned (without resort to authority) that because territorial law prohibited the export of quail at all times, the killing of quail for the purpose of export constituted an unlawful killing, regardless of whether it occurred during the open season. [FN116] Thus, the court said, the Lacey Act's application to the transport of unlawfully killed game was properly triggered. [FN117]
Next, the court addressed the constitutionality of the territorial law's restriction on the export of game. Relying on the state ownership doctrine and the state's police power, the court concluded that game remains state property after it is killed and is subject to some state control even after it enters interstate commerce. [FN118] Finally, analogizing to a decision upholding the Wilson Act's application of state laws to liquor shipments, the court said: "(I)t surely follows that a congressional enactment like the Lacey act, which makes it a crime to carry out of the state that which can be and is lawfully prohibited by local or state laws, must be upheld." [FN119]
Decisions such as Cohen and Rupert illustrate that by the second decade of this century, both state power to regulate wildlife moving in interstate commerce and the Lacey Act's ability to supplement state wildlife laws were becoming well established, setting the stage for enactment of the Lacey Act's sister statute, the Black Bass Act.
Post by: JDHasty on September 21, 2015, 01:55:37 PM
If money is the motivation for most poaching, what drives the money, according to McLean, are the inflated egos of status seekers accustomed to quick gratification, no matter what the price.
"You often get highly successful people who are type A personalities and are just used to getting what they want," says the federal prosecutor. "They feel they can do anything."
http://fwp.mt.gov/mtoutdoors/HTML/articles/2002/poaching.htm
and from the same article:
Lawful hunters retaliate
Also helping the effort to send poachers packing are legal hunters, who have teamed up with wardens and other officials. The Montana Bowhunters Association, for example, helped persuade the Montana legislature to impose stiffer penalties for poaching. Reward money donated by the Foundation for North American Wild Sheep has helped apprehend bighorn sheep poachers. And the Montana Board of Outfitters has assisted FWP in apprehending unlicensed outfitters. In addition, regular hunters and nonhunters increasingly report poaching activities.
******************
Sounds to me as though someone was fed up with this clown and his crew showing up and strutting around like they owned the State of Montana. From what I have seen in print the Montana Fish and Game rec'd a tip that led to this playing out as it did.
Post by: pianoman9701 on September 21, 2015, 01:55:45 PM
Post by: Bigshooter on September 21, 2015, 02:31:08 PM
Post by: Jonnyjammer on September 21, 2015, 02:33:42 PM
Post by: Bigshooter on September 21, 2015, 03:04:35 PM
Sorry sir but I respectfully disagree,If they dont charge him with the Lacey Act they didnt charge him with all they could have.If we all want this poaching to stop,then we need to send a strong clear message no matter how popular the criminal may be. :twocents:
If they didn't charge him the law didn't apply or they couldn't make it stick.
Post by: Jonnyjammer on September 21, 2015, 03:08:12 PM
Post by: buckfvr on September 21, 2015, 03:16:16 PM
Post by: Special T on September 21, 2015, 03:26:38 PM
I think lots of people have made mistakes. I think the motivation between the mistakes with matt and ted are different.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I547 using Tapatalk
Post by: JDHasty on September 21, 2015, 03:29:54 PM
Martin Archery still has his endorsement and photo up on their website. What market are they after, the poacher/trespasser segment?
Post by: Whitpirate on September 21, 2015, 03:30:11 PM
I dont know and not being a smarty pants but what would you consider trade.I consider anything you make money on in any way to be trade,therefore all of the trade made from these hunts should be under the lacey act.
It doesn't matter what I consider trade. I'd like to see a Lacey Act charge on this. But the fact is that the whole point of Lacey was to take away the incentive for people to sell wild game meat and parts, which was a leading cause of the destruction of herds and was endangering species. The act is pretty specific in targeting trade in wild game across state borders. There could well be other laws which apply, but I don't think Lacey is one of them. I only play a lawyer on the internet, so it might apply. :dunno:
The AK guys (on another thread here) were charged with Lacey Act violations. It seems a pretty similar set of circumstances, but I am not familiar with the nuances of Lacey Act jurisprudence.
http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/wireStory/hunting-show-host-charged-poaching-alaska-33757764
The above is the one Curly is noting. This is the Alwine/TSoM case.
The AK guys were guiding customers in......essentially selling access to game meat where they had no permit.
Post by: Jonnyjammer on September 21, 2015, 03:31:47 PM
Post by: JDHasty on September 21, 2015, 03:53:38 PM
Why did you plead guilty in the Alaska case?
TN: “Just like in California, to fight the corrupt system would have bankrupted me, taken me away from my life support careers for God knows how long, and I don’t trust our court system. This Alaska charge was an unintentional technical violation of an unprecedented, never-before-heard of law, only in the southeast region of Alaska, where if your bullet or arrow shows any sign of hitting a bear, then your tag is invalidated. I still can’t find anyone who has ever heard of such a regulation, even amongst lifetime Alaska resident hunters, guides and outfitters, even the judge in Ketchikan stated on record during the court hearing that he had never heard of such a law. I was blindsided by this, and to my knowledge, the only person to ever be charged under this bizarre regulation.”
Did you have a blood trail on the first bear? How long did you look for it?
TN: “Yes, a minimal bloodtrail. My son and I, as always, searched diligently for many hours, even days. When we reviewed the tape in stop action, we realized that the arrow had actually glanced off the rib and not penetrated the animal. The animal was not hurt and certainly not killed.”
Did you know that Alaska had a law that stated that wounded equals a filled tag?
TN: “No. I’ve hunted for 60 years, 35 years in Alaska, and everyone knows that the universal tagging law everywhere has always been; “upon taking possession of the animal the tag must be applied.” This new, unprecedented regulation exists only in this southeast area of Alaska. I cannot find anyone who has ever heard of this rule.”
Will you hunt in Alaska again?
TN: “Absolutely, I love Alaska and the great people and hunting there.”
What do you have to say to the hunters who are now calling you a poacher?
TN: “I was raised to obey all laws, and I have throughout my life. I have never hunted without all the proper licenses, tags, permits, making certain I use the legal weapon, legal arrowhead, legal ammo, legal orange in the proper region. I have never hunted out of season or illegally after dark, nor have I ever knowingly broken any of the indescribable, outrageous volumes of strange, arbitrary, illogical, capricious game laws that exist. I am not a poacher, and people who claim that I am are small minded, shallow haters. My critics are mostly jealous because I am my own boss and have created an amazing quality of life for my family and myself through incredible hard work and dedication. You find someone who has a problem with me and you’re looking at an ignorant, cheap person. My supporters are legion, and the finest Americans there are. I am constantly invited to take terminally ill children on their last hunts, and to host the heroic wounded warriors of the US Military on hunting trips around the world. The absolute best of the best are on my side, so my detractors are exposed for the fools that they are. I couldn’t feel better about my real reputation and position in life.”
Read more: http://www.handgunsmag.com/blogs/sixguns-sagebrush/teds-own-words-on-the-alaska-incident/#ixzz3mPsszCUB
Post by: Miles on September 21, 2015, 03:56:03 PM
Post by: JDHasty on September 21, 2015, 04:03:56 PM
Matt seems to have disappeared from here and Facebook. A guy who made an honest mistake usually doesn't tuck tail and run...
Ding, ding, ding - we have a winner here :yeah:
Post by: Rainier10 on September 21, 2015, 04:16:42 PM
http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,172574.msg2281268.html#msg2281268
This is just so disappointing. Temptation is a terrible thing. I really feel bad for him, we all stumble from time to time but to be in the spotlight like he was and make so many mistakes. One time would be a whole lot easier to get over but there is obviously a pattern of this behavior.
Post by: Bigshooter on September 21, 2015, 04:30:15 PM
well thats fine unless they made a deal and we dont know about it,What do you say about the trespassing?Did he get what he could have for that to?
The charges came from the trespassing.
Post by: Jonnyjammer on September 21, 2015, 04:47:03 PM
Post by: saylean on September 21, 2015, 04:51:27 PM
Post by: JLS on September 21, 2015, 05:01:34 PM
Post by: Jonnyjammer on September 21, 2015, 05:03:21 PM
Post by: Jonnyjammer on September 21, 2015, 05:39:00 PM
Post by: Sitka_Blacktail on September 21, 2015, 05:58:48 PM
Intentionally buying resident licenses in one state when you live in another isn't just a "mistake". I'd be willing to bet a large chunk of change he knew exactly what he was doing all along. If he didn't, he's absolutely dumber than a rock.
Too easy to be caught in this day of computers.
The Governor of Alaska's new pick to be on the Board of Fish was tripped up last winter when he was investigated and prosecuted for buying a resident license in Montana when he wasn't a resident there.
http://www.alaskajournal.com/Alaska-Journal-of-Commerce/Breaking-News-2015/Roland-Maw-charged-in-Montana/
I don't think the money he saved by claiming to be a resident will make up for his lost wages, lost prestige, and a possible conviction for Premanent Fund fraud in Alaska, not to mention the loss of hunting and fishing rights in the western compact states.
Post by: JDHasty on September 21, 2015, 08:23:26 PM
You havent looked very hard for an Idol if you came up with me lol
Matt Alwine
http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,162801.25.html
Posted in Oct 2014, perhaps after he was aware that the gig was up.
Post by: ribka on September 21, 2015, 09:32:52 PM
Was whitetail freak in on this too?
I see he was filming alwines hunts and is a friend
From the string below a post labeled Buck of a Lifetime
You havent looked very hard for an Idol if you came up with me lol
Matt Alwine
http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,162801.25.html
Posted in Oct 2014, perhaps after he was aware that the gig was up.
Post by: Jonnyjammer on September 21, 2015, 10:14:33 PM
Post by: X-Force on September 21, 2015, 10:18:24 PM
Hope he learned from the experience.
Post by: Jonnyjammer on September 21, 2015, 10:29:49 PM
Post by: ribka on September 22, 2015, 05:08:08 PM
Curious about what went on in that ID hunt
http://www.spokesman.com/blogs/outdoors/2015/sep/17/chewelah-man-trophy-state-mind-video-host-convicted-illegal-hunting-montana/#comments
Was whitetail freak in on this too?
I see he was filming alwines hunts and is a friendFrom the string below a post labeled Buck of a Lifetime
You havent looked very hard for an Idol if you came up with me lol
Matt Alwine
http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,162801.25.html
Posted in Oct 2014, perhaps after he was aware that the gig was up.
Post by: JDHasty on September 23, 2015, 09:32:11 AM
Post by: PolarBear on September 23, 2015, 09:40:34 AM
Post by: 101521 on September 23, 2015, 10:46:39 AM
Matt and Shane are probably plotting together on which land to sneak on next. :chuckle: I have heard for many years that Matt and hunwa were prone to ignore boundary lines and rules, this crap pretty much confirms it. It gives real, honest hunters a black mark and even more ammo for the anti's. Hunting ethics are fading fast.
Where in any of this does it mention Shane aka HuntWA??? Or are you accusing him of this along with Alwine because he is a friend and guilty by association? Only people I saw mentioned were two young men. Please show me where I missed it PolarBear
Post by: Dr. Death on September 23, 2015, 10:56:41 AM
Post by: headshot5 on September 23, 2015, 10:58:55 AM
http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,175634.0.html (http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,175634.0.html)
See pages 8 and 9 of this thread.
Post by: PolarBear on September 23, 2015, 11:12:31 AM
He has been accused of trespassing much like Matt in another thread.Matt and Shane are probably plotting together on which land to sneak on next. :chuckle: I have heard for many years that Matt and hunwa were prone to ignore boundary lines and rules, this crap pretty much confirms it. It gives real, honest hunters a black mark and even more ammo for the anti's. Hunting ethics are fading fast.
Where in any of this does it mention Shane aka HuntWA??? Or are you accusing him of this along with Alwine because he is a friend and guilty by association? Only people I saw mentioned were two young men. Please show me where I missed it PolarBear
Post by: 10thmountainarcher on September 23, 2015, 11:23:13 AM
attached in one of the threads on here, on the buck g2 that shane shot, there was some concern that where he had a trail cam placed was on private land, and he did not have the landowners permission to be there. Since then Shane has pulled down those pics from his thread.
http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,175634.0.html (http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,175634.0.html)
See pages 8 and 9 of this thread.
The pictures that high country claims are on his buddies property are still viewable. I'm not going to jump to conclusions, but high country did say that some of the landmarks that are seen in the photo are not on his friends property. without both INVOLVED persons stories, no one has any idea what has occurred. The ones that are already making a decision on Shane are wrong for doing so. If you read the thread, it seems as if we will never know the full story as the accuser (highcountry) already stated that he will not provide updates.
Post by: 10thmountainarcher on September 23, 2015, 11:24:41 AM
He has been accused of trespassing much like Matt in another thread.Matt and Shane are probably plotting together on which land to sneak on next. :chuckle: I have heard for many years that Matt and hunwa were prone to ignore boundary lines and rules, this crap pretty much confirms it. It gives real, honest hunters a black mark and even more ammo for the anti's. Hunting ethics are fading fast.
Where in any of this does it mention Shane aka HuntWA??? Or are you accusing him of this along with Alwine because he is a friend and guilty by association? Only people I saw mentioned were two young men. Please show me where I missed it PolarBear
Just so we are clear, these are two EXTREMELY different circumstances. I do not know Shane at all, but what Matt did was not just trespassing.
Post by: Whitpirate on September 25, 2015, 06:18:45 AM
Matt seems to have disappeared from here and Facebook. A guy who made an honest mistake usually doesn't tuck tail and run...
Ding, ding, ding - we have a winner here :yeah:
With anti pressure and holier than thou hunters I'd bet most would deactivate their accounts for a time.
Post by: trophyhunt on September 25, 2015, 06:26:32 AM
Post by: Mr Mykiss on October 30, 2015, 01:47:51 PM
And it looks like I've lost an idol...There for a second I forgot you were my idol...
You havent looked very hard for an Idol if you came up with me lol :bdid:
Post by: JDHasty on November 14, 2015, 09:03:56 PM
I don't know if anyone else feels this way, but me thinks... these "hunting" shows have to continually and everlastingly up the ante. And as such, there is a natural progression towards hunting high fence or worse. "every business needs to expand and grow if it is to survive" is what I learned in Business 101. But is that necessarily true? Maybe it is, but maybe it isn't.
I haven't owned a television since the 1980's and as such all I see of them is when visiting others home.
So: my question is... What about a hunting show that is not 100% invested in taking an animal that is at the top of the charts, but is a good representative example of decent representative example of a mature animal of the species being hunted?
Does that hunter have a marketable product, or are people tuning in to see and live vicariously through the taking of bigger and better every week? I really don't know, I don't have television.
I can appreciate the effort to better one's personal best each year, BUT I really admire those individuals I know who score a nice mature blacktail every other year... or so. Fair chase, I know people who show up and shoot a big buck off the deck of a friend who has been feeding year round and that, to me, is like walking up to a feedlot and using a bolt gun to drop a longhorn bull that has horns that are six feet wide as he nibbles silage from a feed bunk.
I guess what I am getting at is hunting, like private moments with one's wife, is too personal an experience to post video on the net. I really don't care for hunting shows because they are all about the end product to me and as with posting one's intimate moments... how do we top this and keep the consumer coming back.
There is only so much info that one can convey before sensationalism is the end product. But at a certain point, how do we top that?
Just sitting here thinking about it. Perhaps one or two episodes of an Alwine taking a trophy bull and one or two of him taking a trophy buck and then he has to get a real job?
I just don't know how a program succeeds in holding an audience, in a hobby such as hunting, when the pleasure morps from just being born in today's America where being in the field is the goal, to having to provide the money shot each week.
I just don't think it is possible, but those of you who watch television, and especially these programs, may be able to enlighten me. What brings you there? Is it to live vicariously through the star's taking of a large antlered animal? I just don't know.
I have a cousin who has many, many trophy animal mounts in his home in Montana. Really spectacular Montana elk and Mule deer. But mixed in are whitetail morphodite retarded looking whitetails he has shot on high-fence operations.
So were those elk animals he hunted in The Bob, or are they caged elk that took no more effort than paying the freight on a fenced shoot of someone's pet? I don't know and what is more all of his "trophy" animals are suspect.
Post by: mfswallace on November 14, 2015, 09:21:59 PM
It looks like Matt Alwine's "state of mind" was anything other than honorable. Thank God that this miscreant has the presence of mind to just go away.
I don't know if anyone else feels this way, but me thinks... these "hunting" shows have to continually and everlastingly up the ante. And as such, there is a natural progression towards hunting high fence or worse. "every business needs to expand and grow if it is to survive" is what I learned in Business 101. But is that necessarily true? Maybe it is, but maybe it isn't.
I haven't owned a television since the 1980's and as such all I see of them is when visiting others home.
So: my question is... What about a hunting show that is not 100% invested in taking an animal that is at the top of the charts, but is a good representative example of decent representative example of a mature animal of the species being hunted?
Does that hunter have a marketable product, or are people tuning in to see and live vicariously through the taking of bigger and better every week? I really don't know, I don't have television.
I can appreciate the effort to better one's personal best each year, BUT I really admire those individuals I know who score a nice mature blacktail every other year... or so. Fair chase, I know people who show up and shoot a big buck off the deck of a friend who has been feeding year round and that, to me, is like walking up to a feedlot and using a bolt gun to drop a longhorn bull that has horns that are six feet wide as he nibbles silage from a feed bunk.
I guess what I am getting at is hunting, like private moments with one's wife, is too personal an experience to post it on the net. I really don't care for hunting shows because they are all about the end product to me and as with posting one's intimate moments... how do we top this and keep the consumer coming back.
There is only so much info that one can convey before sensationalism is the end product. But at a certain point, how do we top that?
Just sitting here thinking about it. Perhaps one or two episodes of an Alwine taking a trophy bull and one or two of him taking a trophy buck and then he has to get a real job?
I just don't know how a program succeeds in holding an audience, in a hobby such as hunting, when the pleasure morps from just being born in today's America where being in the field is the goal, to having to provide the money shot each week.
I just don't think it is possible, but those of you who watch television, and especially these programs, may be able to enlighten me. What brings you there? Is it to live vicariously through the star's taking of a large antlered animal? I just don't know.
I have a cousin who has many, many trophy animal mounts in his home in Montana. Really spectacular Montana elk and Mule deer. But mixed in are whitetail morphodite retarded looking whitetails he has shot on high-fence operations.
So were those elk animals he hunted in The Bob, or are they caged elk that took no more effort than paying the freight on a fenced shoot of someone's pet? I don't know and what is more all of his "trophy" animals are suspect.
Sasquatch is a show that doesn't harvest all the time and is more about the experience. I can't watch all the shows cause there somewhat slow but still ok....
Post by: STIKNSTRINGBOW on November 15, 2015, 08:41:08 AM
Quote
Washington resident Matthew Alwine appeared in Park County Justice Court - Montana - and pled to/was sentenced for multiple counts of trespassing, illegal hunting and killing of trophy bull elk, mule deer, and trophy whitetail deer. Alwine filmed a show called Trophy State of Mind while poaching some of these animals. Fines totaled $11,180 with a loss of all hunting privileges for 48 months in Montana and potentially Interstate Wildlife Violator Compact participating states. Washington Fish and Wildlife Officers and Detectives assisted in the investigation and search warrants served in Washington revealed much of the evidence used in the case.
Other suspects charged during the investigation in March of 2015, included Dalton Harum (WA) (fail to obtain landowner permission 5 x 5 bull elk – 2014), forfeited fine $170 and elk antlers and Zach Samek (WA) criminal trespass on private property (videoed the Harum elk hunt) forfeited fine $185.