THP / Fine / Warden

[captpete]

About 25-30yrs ago my brother-in-law wanted to go duck hunting with me and just video the hunt. I contacted the DNR officer that patrolled our area to see if my BIL needed a license & stamps. He said, technically my BIL did not need them if is only videoing. BUT, if he touches a decoy, picks up a shell I drop, rearranges the brush on the blind, points out a duck to me, etc., he is participating in the hunt. The officer advice was my BIL would actually be better off if he sat somewhere other than in the blind with me or spend the $35-$40 for license/stamps and have fun.

For spring turkey hunting this is taken directly from the handout regulations book. It doesn't mention anything about videoing, but this handout is not the complete set of regs.

HELPING OTHER HUNTERS
A resident hunter with a valid spring turkey
hunting license for any season may assist
other hunters in any season. A nonresident
may assist other hunters only in the zone and
season indicated on his or her license. The
hunter doing the assisting may not carry a
shotgun or bow or shoot a turkey unless he or
she has a valid license and an unfilled
transportation tag for that zone and season.
 

[Kygobblergetter]

For whatever it's worth... my buddy wanted to come with me to hunt Mississippi a few years ago and video the hunt. Not for YouTube or anything. We don't post hunts, I was going for a couple days and wanted someone to make the drive and share camp with. We noticed this in the regs and called MDWFP for clarification. He bought a license and videoed me killing a bird. He's a good friend.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That is a good friend! That's an expensive license to pay for to video a hunt.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

To top that off... we found another bird that evening. I told him to try and kill it the next morning and he said he was perfectly content to watch me shoot that one as well. I didn't kill him and he was a complete screwball bird. But that changes nothing. He was up to bat the next year in Florida but "forgot" to load his gun and told me I better shoot that Osceola before he got out of there. After I killed it he told me it wouldn't have made any sense for him to shoot it when that was the bird to finish my grand slam. He also hunted Indiana with me last year when season was nearing its end and he still had a Kentucky tag to fill. I killed in Indiana that morning. Him, my wife, and I went to one of HIS spots on the last day of the Kentucky season and when we finally got a bird to break he tried everything in his power to let my wife shoot. It didn't work out that way and he killed the bird. But he genuinely felt bad about it. I have been able to get him to shoot a few in front of me over the years though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Greg Massey]

I think we are losing sight of the REAL picture here.  This has NOTHING to do with how WE view or feel about THP and their videos, followers and possible detriment to turkey hunting.  What we need to focus on is the Rule of Law.  The argument I have is there was ZERO intent to Hunt.  Most State Regs have a page that refers to Manner of Taking and NO where does it state taking game with a camera.  If this is the State of MS view, then people that are nature lovers, videoing or taking pictures with a camera of elk, deer, turkeys, bears etc could be written a ticket for Hunting Without a License as well.  I contend that if the State of Mississippi can do this to THP and take away their 1st Amendment rights, they can do this to any of us as well.  Great thread Greg and Great posts everyone.

X2 ... AS I said it's not about BASHING THP , ITS ABOUT THIS LAW AND IT WAS A NEW LAW ,,, I AGREE WITH YOU 100 Percent bbcoach..... Thanks

I agree, lots of good posts about the thread...

[eggshell]

That certainly seems like a law that should be challenged if it's truly as vague as it seems. I hope there's more definition somewhere. I wonder if the cameraman had any calls or hunting gear on him or played any part in the hunt. Like most stories on the web, there's probably more to it. Like has already been said, by what I've read you taking any picture of any animal could be construed as hunting. Tourist be aware. I never had any desire to go to MIss. but now I am certain I don't ever want to go there. 

[Greg Massey]

That certainly seems like a law that should be challenged if it's truly as vague as it seems. I hope there's more definition somewhere. I wonder if the cameraman had any calls or hunting gear on him or played any part in the hunt. Like most stories on the web, there's probably more to it. Like has already been said, by what I've read you taking any picture of any animal could be construed as hunting. Tourist be aware. I never had any desire to go to MIss. but now I am certain I don't ever want to go there. 

All he had with him was a video camera, again a Iphone can be a video camera ....

[Missed mallards]

The wording allows for some grey area. In short, a challenge would probably get it thrown out per the written word.

Easy fix here.

If someone wishes to film hunting a public resource, tack on a filming fee. That'd would eliminate the questions and such.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[joey46]

Normally when new and obviously ambiguous regulations are implemented violators are given warnings and clarifications.  I'm sure THP being involved had nothing to do with this incident.  There aren't enough "eye roll" emoji for this post.
MS should be embarrassed. 

[Turkeyfever]

He broke the law plain and simple. Nonresidents have to be drawn and if drawn are allowed to bring 1 non hunting,  licensed guest. It's on the nonresidents page in the question and answers. Mississippi put the part about a licensed guest in bold black print. THP admits they broke the rule and just didn't read that part. The rule is not hidden , I just looked at it again the question on the page for drawn nonresidents, Can I bring a guest? Answer is you may have 1 licensed non hunting guest. Should have read the rules, you travel and do this for a living. Good job by the Warden. Admit your mistake (they have)pay the fine and move on.

[GobbleNut]

I just went to the site and read the regulation. I will repeat what I said previously. The regulation says only that the guest must be "licensed". It says nothing about having a Mississippi turkey license. I have a drivers license.  Therefore I would be a "licensed guest".  Anybody that wanted to challenge this regulation would have firm footing legally in my opinion. 

Having said that, we all know that the regulation is intended to infer that the guest must have a valid turkey license.  The fact that they did not simply include that clarification just indicates to me that whoever wrote the regulation is, simply put, incompetent.

End of story. 

[Marc]

I just went to the site and read the regulation. I will repeat what I said previously. The regulation says only that the guest must be "licensed". It says nothing about having a Mississippi turkey license. I have a drivers license.  Therefore I would be a "licensed guest".  Anybody that wanted to challenge this regulation would have firm footing legally in my opinion. 

Having said that, we all know that the regulation is intended to infer that the guest must have a valid turkey license.  The fact that they did not simply include that clarification just indicates to me that whoever wrote the regulation is, simply put, incompetent.

End of story. 

Heck of a good catch...  You are either my wife, or my new attorney...

[Neill_Prater]

Falls in the category of "damned if you do, damned if you don't."  I can imagine the outcry if it came to light that THP was let off with a warning for an infraction that perhaps resulted in a ticket and fine for someone else.

There are myriads of laws that I might not agree with, but, as I've heard before, "it doesn't have to make sense, it's the law", and if one chooses to break that law whether by intent or oversight, one should be prepared to accept the consequences. Ignorance of the law is no excuse.

From what I have seen, THP handled the situation responsibly. Could we ask more of anyone else?

Sent from my motorola edge 5G UW (2021) using Tapatalk

[arkrem870]

I didn't think Mississippi allows filming on public lands. They have signs up in some places pointing that out.

[bbcoach]

I didn't think Mississippi allows filming on public lands. They have signs up in some places pointing that out.

Personally I still stand on my previous statements to challenge this law.  What takes Precedence, the BILL OF RIGHTS, 1st Amendment of the Constitution, 250 year old plus Federal Law or a New State law that could be interrupted to give anyone a citation for FILMING IN PUBLIC whether with a Hunting Party or not!  The State of Mississippi, to me, has OVERSTEPPED ITS BOUNDS and infringed on OUR Basic Rights of the Constitution of the United States to enact a NEW law that infringes on a Basic 250 plus year old RIGHT that people fought and died for, FOR WHAT?  Money? Power? or because I SAY ITS SO?  I'll go on record and say this; I'm not a Big Fan of THP but I will say this NO STATE should enact laws to TRAMPLE on OUR BILL OF RIGHTS!  Thanks to each of you for allowing me to express my Thoughts and Opinions on Matters of the Heart that each of us should hold Dearly and I Thank those that have Fought and Died for these RIGHTS!                

[eggshell]

From what I have heard others say about Ms. justice system, I think that most likely the result of challenging this in court would receive a ruling from a judge that "a turkey license was implied and reasonable conclusion" and you'd still be fined and added court cost. Let some civil liberty warrior challenge it, pay the fine and call it a lesson learned. This is what I assume the THP guys did and they most likely made a good choice. They are getting their justice in the end, they are informing their constituents and preventing others from getting stupid fines. The part "B" is Ms. will now be marked by some traveling hunters as a "stay away state". Time will tell if this is good law or not. Who knows what the state's intent was, perhaps they actually want to keep the traveling videographers out of the state or clandestinely generate revenue. I think maybe they decided to dance around and handle snakes and the snake bit them. 

[POk3s]

Easy fix here.

If someone wishes to film hunting a public resource, tack on a filming fee. That'd would eliminate the questions and such.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes. And if someone wants to use some turkey calls we should add in a "calling fee". And also if they'd like to wear camouflage we should add in a camouflage fee. And if they'd like to use mapping software on their phone we should add in a mapping fee because you know, we'd hate for people to be profiting off of public land. We should pay more money to the government instead to make sure we have rights. That should fix it.