Buck Hollow Sporting Goods - click or touch to visit their website Midwest Habitat Company

The Franz buck

Status
  • Deleted by N/A
DWilk said:
You want to know what is wrong with deer hunting today? THIS right here is what is wrong with deer hunting today... the ability for people to sit and hide behind a keyboard and gossip about things they know nothing about, and for what gain? To slander somebody's name? To make themselves feel good? To bully with no repercussions?
Click to expand...
Yep. I'm a firm believer that the truth will set you free. What's interesting is guys at work who know nothing about hunting know about this case. Even they couldn't believe how ridiculous the whole thing was. All the publicity has given the DNR a bad name.
 
Well said DWilk and thanks for the comment! My very first thought when the whole case came about was that it was garbage. I don't know Joe or the Trophy pursuit guys. But with the reputation the TP has, I couldn't imagine they would affiliate themselves and their name with someone breaking the law. Just my $0.02.
 
DWilk said:
if you want facts, I suggest you get them straight from the horses mouth, ,
Click to expand...
As much as I dislike this law as written and as much as I have beaten up the DNR for how they enforce it, the closing arguments are fairly convincing. I only need the facts on two questions Derek....was either of the mineral sites within gun range and were they partially exposed?
 
Thinkin Rut said:
I only need the facts on two questions Derek....was either of the mineral sites within gun range and were they partially exposed?
Click to expand...

Are we having an Iowawhitetail trial now?

I will comment on this, but I won't guarantee I'll comment any further in case other people decide they want to act as their own judge and jury.

Was there a mineral site in gun range? Yes
Was it exposed or partially exposed? Absolutely not

And further, that site played no role in the harvest of that buck. Deer were not interested in it for one, and secondly, the buck Joe shot never once visited the site in question ... Not one time, and there was a camera on it from July through Mid September.

Does that satisfy your curiosity?
 
Last edited:
And why was there a wait to cover the site in October when the farm was purchased in August, and why was the DNR told plywood was used prior to the purchase date?
 
Last edited:
Jdubs said:
And why was there a wait to cover the site in October when the farm was purchased in August, and why was the DNR told plywood was used prior to the purchase date?
Click to expand...

Do you remember what you ate for breakfast on January 17, 2015, on the spot, under duress, with 2 game wardens calling you a liar to your face? All of that initial interrogation was disregarded by the judge because it wasnt supported by facts (we provided the facts once we had time to go back through records and receipts) and was recognized in trial as shotty investigative work done a year after the fact.

Oh and by the way I'm done commenting on the trial.
 
Last edited:
OK....bringing this back to a herd management question brought up in that closing statement but relating to a much larger question. The prosecution wrote:

"The baiting prohibition exists for compelling conservation reasons related to fair chase, disease management (which, in turn, impacts population numbers and it has been the law of the land for over four decades."

Well I'm sorry but that argument is complete bullshit. If disease management is really a concern (not arguing it is or it isn't) then baiting/feeding/minerals, etc need to be completely banned.

All the time.

Everywhere.

The state can't argue that baiting is banned, in part, for disease management when it is completely LEGAL to "bait" year round, wherever you want, as long as you are not hunting near it. It is completely ILLOGICAL.
 
Last edited:
DWilk said:
And further, that site played no role in the harvest of that buck. Deer were not interested in it for one, and secondly, the buck Joe shot never once visited the site in question ... Not one time, and there was a camera on it from July through Mid September.
Click to expand...
This is irrelevant. Once you have a mineral site within shooting range from a stand, you step from the gray into the black and white and you had better cover your arse.
 
Thinkin Rut said:
This is irrelevant. Once you have a mineral site within shooting range from a stand, you step from the gray into the black and white and you had better cover your arse.
Click to expand...

I agree! However the DNR and the state were convinced we had used that mineral site to train that buck to come there for years! That was their argument in trial. I'm not trying to be confrontational towards you I just think you'd be amazed at the lengths they stretched to try to squeeze out an ounce of guilt.
 
DWilk said:
Are we having an Iowawhitetail trial now? I will comment on this, but I won't guarantee I'll comment any further in case other people decide they want to act as their own judge and jury. Was there a mineral site in gun range? Yes Was it exposed or partially exposed? Absolutely not And further, that site played no role in the harvest of that buck. Deer were not interested in it for one, and secondly, the buck Joe shot never once visited the site in question ... Not one time, and there was a camera on it from July through Mid September. Does that satisfy your curiosity?
Click to expand...

I believe ya. He got his day in court and that's all that matters. He was found not guilty and got his belongings back. Personally I don't see much of a difference in a food plot and baiting anyways but I do know that folks that hunt over food plots are strongly against baiting. Just seems odd.
 
This entire thread has changed my view on Iowa Whitetail members. I can't believe some of you. Thinking Rut, your just out of line. I'm with DWilk.. Is this an Iowa whitetail trial? Get over it. Justice was served in favor of one of OUR brothers. The DNR did their job by investigating the claim/complaint, as is their job, however filing complaints without facts of the case was wrong.

I will probably remove the Iowa whitetail app from my phone now. As brothers and sisters to the hunting world, some of you have made me... Disgusted. Shoot a big deer and theirs immediate suspicion that your did so illegally. It's pathetic.
 
DWilk said:
However the DNR and the state were convinced we had used that mineral site to train that buck to come there for years!
Click to expand...
Then they bring it back into the gray where they feel the most comfortable. This is where they loose their credibility.

Congrats to Joe for getting his buck back and thanks for the lessons learned.

As the OP I can shut this down and will do so a little later so if you have any other points to make, you need to make them soon. This post has went the distance. Case closed:D
 
Bowhunter500 said:
This entire thread has changed my view on Iowa Whitetail members. I can't believe some of you. Thinking Rut, your just out of line. I'm with DWilk.. Is this an Iowa whitetail trial? Get over it. Justice was served in favor of one of OUR brothers. The DNR did their job by investigating the claim/complaint, as is their job, however filing complaints without facts of the case was wrong.

I will probably remove the Iowa whitetail app from my phone now. As brothers and sisters to the hunting world, some of you have made me... Disgusted. Shoot a big deer and theirs immediate suspicion that your did so illegally. It's pathetic.
Click to expand...

There was a post a while back about "why have so many people left this site". Read the previous 20+ pages and how many people with little information put down a person they have never met.
 
LYON said:
Don't do that. You sound like the type of guy this site needs more of!
Click to expand...

I by no means want to leave this site. It's just sad. I honestly fear to post pictures of any big deer I have on the radar and take within the season. I might make someone jealous and get called in. Just a crappy situation. Happy for Joe tho! What a hell of a buck! God works in mysterious ways, but will never put us through something we can't handle. There's a lesson to learn from all of this, and hopefully the DNR learns from this!!!
 
A thought to consider...

For anyone that feels like leaving this site due to posts that they find discouraging, etc...I would say this, "A smart horse knows enough to eat the hay and spit out the sticks.". There are folks of different stripes everywhere and I would encourage people to focus on the positives and not let the negatives influence too much.

Some people would gripe if the devil died and they are found in all walks of life, not just on IW.
 
Status
  • Deleted by N/A
Top Bottom