The Franz buck

[breckhawk]

We might as well start hunting with handmade spears and flint tips. You have to knap them yourself and hand carve the spear though. Oh and no treestand you have to climb the tree barefoot if you want up there. Better be able to prove you made your spear by hand...better have the building of the it on video.

Wouldn't want us to have any advantages.

On second thought the courts will probably find that I used a knife of carbon steel that was too hard/sharp to carve my spear.

I will just use my bare hands and get it on video next time.

No wait the throat choke I used to put him down was too high on the neck. I didn't kill him fast enough. That's against the law and they will take my trophy.

If I ever kill a 175" deer or better I won't be telling anyone but family.

The whole no hunting over mineral is the absolute DUMBEST law our state has. It's pretty well scientifically concluded that deer stop visiting those sites in September. Every year I have pics up until mid Sep on them....then nothing. Even then all pics are at night. If you are hunting over a pile of corn...duh...violation. Old dirt that has some salt in it? Come on Iowa.

 

[muddy]

Wow this is crazy. I think this will be an easy case for him to win IMO. I predict it comes with reg changes one way or another. If anything it will get more specific.

This got me thinking. I was looking at a piece of property a few months ago. There were some giant holes in the ground that it was obvious that there was mineral there for years and years and years. I bet that stuff is in ground for years without ever adding more. What would a new landowner have to do in that scenario? Get a backhoe and remove a dump truck load of soil? Salt leaches into the soil.

I've had success simply covering the old sites with new dirt. Might take a couple years but it'll help.

 

[mplane72]

I didn't watch the video again but if I remember right there is nothing to indicate the deer is over or near a lick. Though they may well have been one near. Seems like a stretch by the DNR.
I also agree that the law is to vague and mineral is basically useless as bait once the season comes in. DNR biologist should know this and advocate for clarification on the law. They are unlikely to do that though as i think they would like mineral made illegal due to CWD concerns.
I've been on a lot of ground where I have seen a lick that could easily get a guy in trouble the way the law reads now. Of course most guys aren't shooting big bucks on that ground.

 

[thephatchef]

I've hunted with a group primarily on public ground the past 5 years around Lake Red Rock. Literally every year, we get stopped by the DNR officer assigned to the county. Every year, the guy seems to have a corn cob up his butt. Could care less about our success, isn't excited about anything. That's in contrast to a great number of DNR officers who make sure everyone is following the rules and being safe, but are clearly sportsmen who love shooting the breeze with hunters and congratulating everyone on their success. This doesn't surprise me at all having experienced the DNR culture that has been perpetuated in Marion County.

 

[bkcrrtnps]

Just the opposite it needs to be legalized. Too much gray area, mineral is a nonfactor with our season starting in Oct.

Exactly, they could care less come October

 

[bkcrrtnps]

I've hunted with a group primarily on public ground the past 5 years around Lake Red Rock. Literally every year, we get stopped by the DNR officer assigned to the county. Every year, the guy seems to have a corn cob up his butt. Could care less about our success, isn't excited about anything. That's in contrast to a great number of DNR officers who make sure everyone is following the rules and being safe, but are clearly sportsmen who love shooting the breeze with hunters and congratulating everyone on their success. This doesn't surprise me at all having experienced the DNR culture that has been perpetuated in Marion County.

when reading this all I could think of was the Marion Cty officer and stories I've heard

 

[madplotter]

The DNR is in a no win here. If he was turned in they have to follow up and proceed according to the law. I do not blame the DNR for moving forward and conducting their due diligence.

That said, his website makes me sick to my stomach: www.franzbuck.com

 

[rc10pt]

Agree to the fact that we need a hard set of rules regarding baiting. I could care less either way but really? How hard is it to amend that section in the regs. I think the dnr is doing their "due diligence" on this one. No way the case goes too terribly far, unless what they found on the farm dams him beyond an old mineral site. And either way, once this case is settled, it can and will be cited in future cases to help decide the outcomes.

Sent from my iPhone using IW

 

[Thinkin Rut]

I would guess he will be found innocent and I feel he probably knowingly did nothing wrong. My problem with the DNR going the distance on such a fine buck is that no matter the outcome it will forever cast doubt over the hunter and the buck will always have an invisible asterisk by it in the books. The DNR needs to make sure cases like this are a lay up in court before they pull the trigger.

 

[bkcrrtnps]

The DNR is in a no win here. If he was turned in they have to follow up and proceed according to the law. I do not blame the DNR for moving forward and conducting their due diligence. That said, his website makes me sick to my stomach: www.franzbuck.com

Hell, Skip needs a website to sell decals.....why create a website? I think he let it go to his head

 

[muzzleloader128]

Innocent until proven guilty, so why'd he have to turn over the deer? Courts do not care about deer hunting in Iowa, sad but true. Many poachers have been caught and 9 out of 10 get a slap on the wrist. That's why we have so many life long poachers living here. I think he will over come these charges, plain and simple he has video of the hunt, he had proper tags etc, so the soil samples prove what? All dirt in Iowa contains some form of minerals, so I really think it will be easy to convince a jury, or Judge that a jar of dirt is circumstantial, so unless he had no tag or used a spot light this is going to be a big waste of tax payers money.

i will disagree with the innocent until proven guilty part, once the court system has your name on a criminal complaint you are pretty much done with!! unless you want to spend countless dollars on clearing your name...

 

[msauer933]

Hell, Skip needs a website to sell decals.....why create a website? I think he let it go to his head

I agree....kind of a microcosm of what is wrong with the sport. I actually saw one of those decals in Ankeny the other day. The other thing is why would anyone buy a replica of a deer they didn't shoot?

 

[madplotter]

Agree to the fact that we need a hard set of rules regarding baiting. I could care less either way but really? How hard is it to amend that section in the regs. I think the dnr is doing their "due diligence" on this one. No way the case goes too terribly far, unless what they found on the farm dams him beyond an old mineral site. And either way, once this case is settled, it can and will be cited in future cases to help decide the outcomes.

Sent from my iPhone using IW

Pretty much nailed it. Just define it.

But as far as the DNR being vilified, I do not think that is right. They are doing their jobs. All we hear about is how we need more law enforcement but never hear about the DNR getting more resources. Our DNR may not be perfect but to me they have done and still do an admirable job of managing our resources. They navigate a very political climate in this state and walk a fine line with the FB having "their man" in the governors mansion. Compared to other states, we have it pretty good.

 

[Truth&Honest]

Just the opposite it needs to be legalized. Too much gray area, mineral is a nonfactor with our season starting in Oct

Every year we get pictures of the dominant bucks in our area scent checking our mineral licks right up until the actual breeding happens....they stop visiting when the chase/first does go into heat. The best pictures of year are a thick neck buck standing over a salt lick with the trees changing in the background. The older bucks know where the does have been for the last 6 months- licking salt.

 

[Bowtech84]

Dang! I just put the franz buck decal on my van last week!

 

[Sligh1]

I won't read through responses & maybe some friends of mine may disagree but it's keeping me unbiased. My opinion.....
It's garbage. I don't know Franz but I've seen this crap before.
Here's why I think it's garbage....
Based on what I read, it's mineral. Ok, technically illegal, need to cover it, whatever. Maybe he did. Hope he did. Even if he didn't.....
We all know darn good and well deer are not coming to minerals in Fall. If they are, we all know anyone is not putting out there to pull in a mature buck. They aren't. There may be a fringe that disagree with that, you're simply wrong. A giant corn pile or apples - sure, that could attract deer. Minerals in Oct or Nov - if they were legal, I don't think any of us who know deer think it would pull em in to "bait or hunt em". So, I'm gonna say with 99% certaintly - even if there were minerals there - which I think they'd have a hard time proving he didn't cover, etc. - we all know, the guy was not using the minerals to pull that buck in. In general, if minerals are out, it's because: a guy simply forgot OR people run cattle on the land where almost every block in southern iowa would minerals on it from cattle somewher. AND NOT DRAWING DEER IN FALL.
SO - considering I know we probably all agree the dude was not using minerals to bait or pull in deer (even if he had em which I have no clue) - we all know this is because, LIKELY.... A neighbor snuck on there and saw what he considered mineral or a hole (who knows?!?!?!) and got jealous about the buck and called DNR. It's not because someone was concerned some big baiting scheme took place. Minerals do nothing for mature bucks in fall so that's why I say this is a jealousy issue, period. And hopefully the legality of it is a NON-ISSUE as well. "Johny" has a dump truck of apples out - of course we know what's going on. This is not how I see this one, mineral is different and we all know it aside from the technicalities of law which may pinch some folks that didn't have a bit of ill-will in their mind.
How bout this.... How bout we focus on egregious poachers rifling deer outta truck windows, dude's with dump trucks of apples, guys rifling 10 bucks a year, trespassers, etc. This nitpicking outta jealousy is outta hand. We have limited DNR resources that need to be dedicated to the egregious poachers that plague Iowa.
No skin in this game, no knowledge of it, just my cents.

 

[LYON]

How bout we focus on egregious poachers rifling deer outta truck windows, dude's with dump trucks of apples, guys rifling 10 bucks a year, trespassers, etc. This nitpicking outta jealousy is outta hand. We have limited DNR resources that need to be dedicated to the egregious poachers that plague Iowa.

YES! I HOPE, as others have said, the DNR is simply following up on a complaint. The media found out and here we are. Hopefully this is all we hear of it so the DNR can get back to real issues.

 

[Jdubs]

Don't want to distract from lets bash the DNR party but I tend to think there's more to it. Regardless of the track record of the CO I assure you discussions were held with the District Attorney prior to a complaint being filed based on the caliber of this animal and the storm it would cause. Seems to me someone close to this guy provided good info that led to the investigation. Very difficult to file charges on a jealous neighbor finding an old mineral site, placing the kill nearby, and allege baiting. There's more.

 

[moosehunter]

So what about if a fella plants a 20f x 20ft patch of corn for a food plot. He is doing the same thing as a guy planting a 3 acre food plot, just on a small scale. Would the DNR say he was hunting over a baited site? I can't see anything different other than size.

 

[LYON]

So what about if a fella plants a 20f x 20ft patch of corn for a food plot. He is doing the same thing as a guy planting a 3 acre food plot, just on a small scale. Would the DNR say he was hunting over a baited site? I can't see anything different other than size.

From the regs. "Bait does not include food placed during normal agricultural activities". So planting anything, any sized plot, and letting it grow naturally is not illegal