• Help Support TNDeer:

Let's make this SOB famous!!!

It is interesting to me that State of TN (TWRA) issued the citation, instead of DOI (USFWS). Is that typical for DoD installations? I think not.
I hunt on Redstone Arsenal (RSA) in Huntsville, AL. Hunting laws there fall under the state of Alabama law. The games wardens are USFWS wardens. So you got state laws, and in addition base hunting regulations and federal, USFWS, enforcement. Any game citations there end up in Federal Court in Decatur, AL. I do not know if all Post follow that order in prosecution and courts but RSA does.
 
I'm not sure how the Army operates, or if this is a case for the local courts or JAG, but if he was a Naval Officer he would at least be done as far as promotion goes and unless as base Commander he had the authority to do what he did; he would be removed as Base Commander. The military can take legal action if he is convicted in civilian court, they do it with DUI's all the time. I suspect his rank won't get him out of this. But things are very different now than they have been in the past.
 
Why are you all mad about this? There are TWRA game wardens doing the same thing and getting away with it.... i.e. Sgt. Chris Combs... been caught and convicted of poaching and still has his job.... How many of you really believe that the rules only apply to us and not them?
 
It is interesting to me that State of TN (TWRA) issued the citation, instead of DOI (USFWS). Is that typical for DoD installations? I think not.
Andy-

At Oak Ridge WMA, TWRA has the enforcement. It's DOE property though.

However, the Fed's don't want enforcement of non-federal managed species.
 
I'll play devil's advocate here. Every U.S. military installation has a unit dedicated to controlling wildlife, and said unit takes ultimate direction from the commander. This "poacher" in question IS the commander himself, as in the guy who makes the rules. Seeing as how fed rule on a military installation trumps local & state law, I'm betting this case gets tossed out of court within the first five minutes of the first day of hearing.

I've spent my entire adult life on and/or closely affiliated with military installations, and have at times been given the opportunity to hunt an animal. Local &/or state laws do not apply. The goal is to rid an animal or number of animals for the purpose of wildlife population control. It has to be done as part of facility management. If the base in question had to rid a certain number of deer, it would likely either be contracted out to a local pest control business, or the base would have its own in house unit assigned to the job. Either way, inviting the boss(commander) along for a "hunt" is pretty common kiss assery. It's also common for the commander to award hunts to troops or other personnel who have been performing well. If it's a hunt to control deer population, it doesn't matter if the hunter takes a doe fawn or an 11-point buck. It's a deer and counts toward the tally. If any of you were on one of these "hunts", which deer would you pick to shoot?

Given that it was a crossbow fired from inside a truck, on a munitions storage facility, it sounds a whole lot like one of the hunts I just described and as such is well within the commander's authority. Using a crossbow fired from inside the vehicle is the safest, most secure way of performing the task without risking a munitions accident. The feds not charging him is another strong indication that this guy was not out of bounds. Nobody at the top wants the bad publicity of a rogue commanding officer ruffling local feathers. He'd have been dealt with swiftly if he were wrong, more than likely immediately relieved of duty. The story as written just doesn't make sense to me, so I'll reserve my feelings until I find out the final outcome. There just aren't enough details in the article for me to pre-judge. If the guy is guilty then he's made a disgraceful error and should be held accountable. But if he's acting within the confines of his authority, then TWRA and that local paper owe him an enormous apology.
HAAP has a wildlife manager. I live close and have hunted this 4 times. He did it here and in KY.
Well there's the rub. You're conflating civilian rule with military rule. They're different. On a military base, the commander makes the rules. Not you. Not me. Not TWRA. The commander makes the rules. It is not a public hunt. And I would bet dollars to donuts the judge sees it exactly that way as soon as the case is presented.

As for the KY charges, that's a different story & I'll be interested to see how that pans out. If a civilian law was broken he will pay the same consequences anybody else would pay, and he should. I'm not taking up for the guy or justifying his actions. I'm only saying that there's a plausible vindication for at least some of the charges. Taking up pitchforks & torches on a crusade to ruin a guy who has yet to be found guilty seems a bit short sided to me, especially when the only info about it is from an incendiary, vague newspaper report. Like I said in my first post, I'll wait for all the info to be released before jumping to conclusions.
HSAAP has a game manager and deer taken there must be checked against your annual limit with the TWRA. I'm going to concur he's a POS.
 
He's going to be an Army Maintenance Officer on an Air Force Base. That sounds like a demotion to me. Isn't it?
All depends on how you quantify demotion. If he retains Army rank, pay, retirement and benefits, and gets a job with less responsibility, it is seen as a slap in the face to his peers who work their can off, keep their morale compass in check and are routinely assigned more work in the face of these occurrences. Unfortunately, I have seen similar situations play out in DoD over the last 25 years. I call it "screw up, move up" as in a promotion, or "screw up, sit in the corner and retain pay" where a disciplined employee retains pay and is stripped of most responsibilities, sits in an office and produces very little going forward. These occurrences are terrible for workforce morale.
 
HAAP has a wildlife manager. I live close and have hunted this 4 times. He did it here and in KY.

HSAAP has a game manager and deer taken there must be checked against your annual limit with the TWRA. I'm going to concur he's a POS.

If he is the commander, the wildlife manager answers to him. He is the ultimate authority. Deer killed by a hunter no doubt must be checked in. But deer killed for the purpose of pest control, under the commander's direction, would be altogether different.

Again, I'm not defending the guy. I have no idea what's going on aside from what I read in the article. I'm only saying that there plausibly is some conflation of jurisdiction going on here and I'd not be surprised if this doesn't get tossed out of court. As per the news article, the guy screwed up real bad and is probably in deep trouble. That's the picture they've painted and it's got the mob taking up pitchforks & torches. All I'm saying is wait and see. If he really did screw up then he should be in trouble. But if TWRA is prairie dogging the military/civilian line, then a judge will toss this day one, even if the guy is guilty of some of the accusations. If the guy really is guilty, hopefully TWRA did their homework and the charges are appropriate.

I've never seen anything quite like this. He's not just a military officer. He's the commander, as in he is the ultimate authority of what happens within the confines of that base. A state agency does not trump that. Furthermore, if the KY offense occurred on a military installation and that commander sanctioned the hunt, then TWRA has pretty much zero authority to bring charges. Where things get foggy is the accusation of tagging a KY deer in TN. He technically didn't need to tag any of the deer, period, if in fact the KY commander had given him permission. By doing so it opened the door to TWRA applying their rules. What I'm interested in is how the judge will decide which entity has the authority. I have no idea if the KY commander is involved at all. I'm only pointing out that there is a real possibility that this entire thing goes away. Being that I don't actually know the details all I can do is speculate, which isn't worth the time it took to write it. But for conversational entertainment I did it anyway.
 
I don't know how Army officers are, but I know that the most pissed off I ever saw Marine officers is when someone questioned their authority. I can just imagine how that conversation went when he was ticketed, probably something along the lines of - "DO YOU KNOW WHO I AM?!?"

Do TWRA officers wear body cams? This is one I'd really like to see.
 
He's the base commander and should be able to do what he wants with in legal means. If hunting season is open, he's welcome to shoot his 2 buck limit by legal means. I'd love the to know more of how this was notified to the TWRA that him and 2 civilian employees did this in November but didn't come to light till July? Also the one civilian was ticketed for a fishing violation. For him to shoot a deer, then be caught by TWRA for hunting from a vehicle, no orange and other violation, sounds like he had to be turned in by someone inside.

I also find it sad they put his salary in the story. that had nothing to do with the issue. What's really sad, he's making 74k as the commander there, I've got 2 buddies that are engineers there making over 100k and not in charge of anyone.
 
I also find it sad they put his salary in the story. that had nothing to do with the issue. What's really sad, he's making 74k as the commander there, I've got 2 buddies that are engineers there making over 100k and not in charge of anyone.
I would not hang my hat on the accuracy of that statement. Several variables to determine LTC O5 salary and compensation package. Base pay is $75k-125k in general, then housing allowance, etc.
 
Change of command likely has nothing to do with the charges. This is the time of year it happens. I know two other commanders who are in transition right now.

This article says the charges are for killing a deer on army land. If it was army land he either commanded or permission from commander, then TWRA might have an uphill battle getting the charges to stick.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top