New bill could force poachers to pay more - February 13, 2003

Mail Tribune (Medford, OR — Wayback)

2003-03-03

Document text

M/CLOUDY Temp: 42 °F Wind: WNW at 3 mph Monday, March 3, 2003  SECTIONS   Home Page  Local News   Sports  Business  Obituaries  Life  Opinion - Politics  AP News  Weather  Classified  Archives  Site Map  EXTRA   HomeLife Magazine   W3 Magazine   Jobs @ Mail Tribune   Tempo A & E   Oregon CarZone   Wellness Connection  Real Estate  Newspaper in Education  Prime Times  Outdoor Journal  Personals  Movie Times  TV Times   E The People  CLASSIFIEDS  Find a Car  Find a Home  Find a Job  Find Everything  E SOUTHERN OREGON  Automotive  Communities  Entertainment  Publications  Recreation  Calendar  ABOUT US  FAQ  What's New  Advertise  Home Delivery  Classified Ad  Contact Us  Media Kit Email Story to a Friend February 13, 2003 New bill could force poachers to pay more By MARK FREEMAN Mail Tribune A coastal judge and a Medford hunting advocate slipped into a quiet corner of a Shilo Inn kitchen in Lincoln City two years ago to discuss how poachers aren’t fairly paying Oregonians back for their crimes. Outside the kitchen doors swirled the Oregon Hunters Association 2000 state convention, while inside Lincoln County Circuit Court Judge Thomas Branford bent the ears of OHA lobbyist Al Elkins for almost an hour on how fish and wildlife restitution amounts are pathetically low. Branford was especially disgusted that a 1981 statute allowed the judge to assess only a $25 civil penalty against a man who poached a huge halibut the previous year. But there was more. The statute places a value of just $400 on a trophy black-tailed deer, and $750 on an 8-point Roosevelt elk. Poaching a 100-year-old sturgeon garners restitution of $5, or 5 cents a year of its life. Branford and Elkins agreed that, when you’ve got to put a pricetag on wildlife, Oregonians value barn-door-sized halibut more than $2, and its bulls-of-the-woods are worth more to them than $750. "We’ve had a dozen meetings since that day in that kitchen," Elkins says. "It brought forth this whole idea that we really needed to do a real look at what the civil (penalties) are, what they should be and what needs to be done." The result is a new bill before the Oregon Legislature to revamp the antiquated civil penalties, calling for at least a doubling of the monetary values ascribed to most of the state’s fish and wildlife species. The bill, which has yet to get an official number, would lift the state’s fish and wildlife restitution amounts from some of the least in the West to those more in line with neighboring states. Restitution for poached deer and elk would rise to $800 and $1,500, respectfully. The highest values would be rare bighorn sheep and mountain goats, which would jump from $3,500 to $6,800. The smallest payments, game fish such as trout or bass, would double from $5 to $10, and most game birds and silver gray squirrels jump from $10 to $20. Restitution for poached sturgeon and halibut would rise to $250. The bill has the blessings of the Oregon State Police as well as the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, yet neither agency is stumping for its passage. The doubling amounts to an adjustment for inflation in the Pacific Northwest, since the amounts went into effect just before Ronald Reagan took his first presidential oath. The Consumer Price Index here rose 92 percent over that time, and the notion is that restitution needs to do the same. "Values set 22 years ago probably need to be updated," says ODFW Director Lindsay Ball, whose agency gets about $100,000 annually from the penalties. "It’s time to dust it off, look at it and see if these are the appropriate values." The vast majority of fish and wildlife cases in Oregon are misdemeanors or simple violations, commonly leading to fines, probation and occasionally jail time. Judges also have the discretion in poaching cases of adding the restitution, which amounts to paying Oregon back for the public’s fish or wildlife essentially stolen by the poacher. Most states have restitution amounts written into law, and they are regularly reviewed and altered for inflation. The new bill does just that for Oregon. While the proposed amounts are in line with most other states, one main difference will remain: In Oregon, size doesn’t matter. When Oregon drafted the civil penalty statute in 1980, it chose not to follow the lead of other states and increase the penalties for trophy animals. In Washington, the value of a poached deer is $2,000, but one deemed a trophy costs the defendant $12,000. Montana and Utah have sliding scales for trophy animals that can lead to a civil penalty of up to $30,000 for a single animal. Elkins says he initially toyed with the idea of adding a sliding scale on trophy deer and elk, effectively raising the penalty for every point on the animals’ antlers. "But just defining a point got to be extremely difficult, so we dropped it," Elkins says. "The less confusing it is, the better chance we have of it passing." The bill’s draft is expected to get its final review soon, then get a House bill number attached to it. Elkins says he expects a hearing on the bill in the House Agricultural and Natural Resources Committee around the first of March. But just as important, Elkins says, is lobbying judges across Oregon to start levying the penalties once they are updated. There are distinct disparities among Oregon’s rural counties in the amount of assessed wildlife penalties, in part because some judges don’t know about them and some prosecutors don’t press for them. An ODFW review of restitution payments from July 1999 through August 2002 shows that Jackson County poachers paid $7,106 through the program, while Klamath poachers paid $10,185 and Josephine County poachers paid $5,185. Douglas County led the way with more than $27,000 in payments, followed by Branford’s small Lincoln County at almost $19,500. In contrast, Morrow County yielded just $200 in payments over that same span, while Multnomah County poachers paid just $62.50. And no wildlife restitution was paid via cases in Baker, Bend and Benton counties in almost two years. "We’ve got to get judges to understand the statutes and the importance of this," Elkins says. "We just hope that, someday, all the counties will have the passion that Judge Branford does." Reach reporter Mark Freeman at 776-4470, or e-mail [email protected] Printer Friendly Version   Email Story to a Friend Subscribe Archive: Click to Search M Mail Tribune Home Local News  | Sports  | Business  | Obituaries  | Life Opinion - Politics | AP News | Archives  |  Site Map   E Southern Oregon  | Classified   Copyright © 1997-2003 Mail Tribune. All rights reserved. Privacy Policy Website Feedback A D V E R T I S E R S