I don't understand what was done illegally. I read the entire article, and I didn't see where they clearly mentioned just what the illegal part was. Supposedly, he poached it, but how? He hunted the place for ten years, so wasn't he allowed to hunt there? It was shot during season, right? Can doing something the landowner or lease manager doesn't allow be illegal?

I too have a problem seeing where he broke the law, except the self imposed one of the lease manager. The only thing I can think of is that he did not "tag" the deer. That would be breaking the law, but nowhere do I see where he "poached" the deer. He did break lease rules, but that should not be considered poaching by the state. that should be considered being an Ahole by the other lease holders. There has to be more of this to get the Texas GW's involved.

I would like to know the outcome of this! Thanks for posting this however there are a few unanswered questions regarding the charges. What were the Federal charges in violation of the Lacey Act?! Had this idiot Weiner already tagged out before shooting the "Super Buck"? Is the ranch owner going to file in civil court?

The hunter paid $10,000 to hunt. He harvested a deer on land he legally had a right to hunt. He had the deer he harvested mounted. I'll assume by a taxidermist who checked the tag. I don't believe it is illegal for an out of state hunter to harvest a deer and take it home in a cooler. If he had a license.... I'll assume he did since he hunted there for 10 years. Maybe not. Just not sure why a person would be on a lease for 10 years at 10K and not own a license.
As far as check-in the article reads as though it is a "ranch rule" not a state rule. So I can see he violated a ranch rule or ranch contract. Not sure the State gets involved with enforcing lease contracts as long as the follow state laws.. A lease might give you the right to hunt only mallards but it would be hard for the state to knock on your door because you shot a legal wood duck. Usually breaking a lease rule gets you thrown off or maybe a fine.

More to the story.. I think.

I read the whole article and don't see where any laws were broken. This is Texas and not checking in a deer at ranch headquarters has never been against the law. I also don't understand why anyone would go to that much trouble and expense to catch someone in a lie.

The article did seem to me to be written by someone that isn't all that familiar with Texas hunting, so I'm guessing they missed a detail.

Sounds a lot like "Making a Murder" to me. Ranch owner wasn't happy that trophy buck was killed, has the money and the contacts to get what he thinks is his property back, and forces his hand. No doubt the hunter knew he violated lease rules, which can't be enforced by Gamewardens. Everything about this story sounds fishy, but then again, the writer is no different than the buffoons we watch on the news everyday, and likely doesn't have all the facts of the case.

If a rancher tells you that you can only shoot one animal, yet you kill two, is that poaching? Is it punishable by the state? If a rancher tells you you can shoot a blackbuck and you shoot an axis, same question. Where is the line drawn? If the county is two bucks, but the ranch rules are one buck, can you get charged for shooting two?

Not tagging deer, moving deer off property without tag, across state line, and could possibly face civil charges from other lease holders. Depends on definition of poach. Just asking ??

Same here. No tag is a state violation but not sure with the way the story was told, how they could know he didn't.

That's what I want to know. I've always wondered this, and the article makes it seem as though that's the case.

It never said that he didn't tag the animal. Or did I miss that.

That's what I thought.

It mentioned it, but it didn't specifically say that's what he did. It's not written in a very clear manner.

I may be wrong but I've always seen it as the lessee pays the lessor a trespass fee to hunt on their land. The game belongs to the collective state and is subject to state laws and limits set up by the state. The landowner may be able to file a civil suit for violating the lease agreement but I don't think the state has anything they can charge you with criminally.

Those are my thoughts as well but if this story is to be believed, we would be wrong.

There was obviously something that the story missed. If the only violation was of a stated lease rule to "check" the animal then the state wouldn't be involved. My guess is that this rule, from TXPW Outdoor Annual is the issue:

All deer taken on a property for which MLD permits have been issued must be tagged with the appropriate type of MLD permit. That includes recording the relevant details on the "TPWD Deer Harvest Log."

Failing to do this may be the reason "poaching" is cited. The hunter could have had permission to hunt, he could have tagged the deer with his license tag (and license log) but would have violated the regulations if the property was MLD. It does seem an extreme level of effort for the landowner to follow... my guess is that there was more of a falling out than just shooting the large deer. It may have precipitated the shooters action. He may have thought something like, "I'm angry with these people, so I'm going to shoot that big deer anyway!"

It was a poorly-written article, with the most pertinent details, what made the act illegal and hence "poaching".

Jim just sounds like an @$$hole who didnt give a [censored] about his customer for many years and wants to do max to penalize him. Jim should have just talked to Weiner and asked for a payment for violation.

Well, Im sure the land was under a wildlife tax exemption and you have to have an approved wildlife management plan which it sounds like they did. The plan called for only bucks 5-6 years or older to be taken and for all bucks to be checked in. The hunter killed the buck at 4 years of age and then did not check it in. Thus violating the states required management plan and seems like that would qualify as poaching an illegal deer.

None of which is mentioned in the article, yes it mentioned the hunters had a plan, but not that any state laws were violated.

Taxidermist don't care about the tags, only processors as that is the final destination for the meat, which is what constitutes the "game". The horns are just a trophy

Shooting a 4 year old deer instead of a 5 year old deer isn't poaching. Judging a deer on the hoof isn't exact. Lot of answered questions to that article. Something doesn't add up.

Taxidermist in Texas have to keep a log and all info from the tag/hunter resource document on the buck being mounted for 2 yrs now IIRC. So, Yes they do care about the tags.
If the deer was killed under MLD and not tagged with MLD permit then there is the problem. No mention of any tag, but my guess would be he tagged with his regular license tag. What we don't know is if he tagged it with his own tag of his license and made up a boggus ranch to write in on the tag when he filled it out. That would be a major issue on top of another major issue. There are plenty of those pesky details like that they are left out the article that we don't know about.

If the head does not accompany the carcass, then the head must be accompanied by a Wildlife Resource Document (WRD). 

WRD