Hey BOB you should probably close this b4 some unsuspecting seat belt violater winds up with a night stick up his arse! :rolleyes:

If the duck was captive bred, it must be either toe clipped, tattood, pinioned or banded.....it was none of the above, thus a wild mallard.

How do you figure that Homer... I grew up on a farm with lots of ducks, we never clipped 'em. Only time I have ever seen clipped ducks is around the bigger farms,

Wish my world was black and white...

Bob, I guess I added more fuel to the fire, and for that I apologize.. It just seemed like a harmless way to vent without anyone suffering any physical harm. I will strive to behave myself in the future..Nook

Homer,

Thanks for the legal language. :p
Welcome aboard!

Her claim was that she got the duck from a friend who raises mallards. If the duck was white, green, purple or red (domestic type duck) then there would be no problem. Since it was a mallard, it had to have one of those identifiers before she could keep it. I'm sorry, but I have to side with the wardens on this one. Where do you draw the line? Pick up a baby fawn and bring it home, pick up a baby raccoon and bring it home, pick up a baby whatever and bring it home......I don't think so. Wildlife belongs in the wild. Someone in that office was bothered enough by her having that duck in diapers and waddling around on tile floors to call it in. Personally, I'm outraged that the director of the department gave them the duck back and didn't back his officers. My two cents worth even if it doesn't have anything to do with fishin'.

I am sorry that this post has ruffled so many tailfeathers, so to speak. My only intention was to discuss the value of the action of these specific officers, not to begin a cop bashing session. The main question I have is, was this the best use of the officers time? Let the lawyers decide who broke the law. Let us, as stewards of the resource, tax payers and lincense purchasers decide how our wilflife enforcement personnel should be focusing their limited resources. My heart is telling me that our Fish and Wildlife officers can make much better use of their time by trying to protect species which are intrinsically more apt to be exploited, like our salmon and steelhead.

Again, my apologies for all the nonsense this caused. This is the type of issue that should unite us as fishermen and women, not divide us.

Homer... Things like this should be looked into. It's just the action taken by enforcement seems to be out of proportion to the situation; that doesn't sit well with me.
And I'm no fan of the Director too.

Goinfishin sounds like an officer I would enjoy socializing with. He seems to have a sense of humor and keeps the macho crap in check.

The officers involved could have walked away at any time, but they just had to get that duck no matter the cost. Just how far would they have taken it if the woman went totally psycho on them? It was her pet after all and their is no telling how far some people will go to protect their pet. Would they have drawn their weapons? At what point would they have decided it wasn't worth it? Again, common sense left the building as they walked in.

Just my opinion, but the officers lost their cool when the lady refused to hand over the duck. They should have just walked away...but macho officers don't put up with having their authority questioned....

I'll be curious to hear the final outcome of this story.

I'm sure there could have been other ways to handle the situation but consider this.....the Game Wardens that responded to the duck call did so because a concerned citizen made a complaint about a woman holding wildlife in captivity. If the wardens faild to respond, they would have been in trouble for not enforcing the law. Could they have gotten a search warrant? Certainly......and wasted countless hours of a judge, and prosecutors getting that warrant. They didn't need a warrant because it was in a business open to the public and they were taken voluntarily to see the duck in the back room. The lady who had the duck admitted that her boyfriend, the miserable bafoon who owned the business, was the one who caught the duckling in the first place and gave it to her. He's the one who made all the stink and pushed his weight around with all of his name dropping and somehow scared the F&W director into making an outrageous decision to give her the duck back. Auburn prosecutor's laughed in his face and refused to file charges against the wardens....does that tell you anything? I think that from now on, any Game Warden in Washington is going to refuse to take any action when a citizen calls with a holding wildlife in captivity complaint.......why should they when their director craps backwards on them all the time.

Just wondering where you get that idea ET? They counldn't just walk away. When an officer has started dealing with a violation he must follow through with it. the only exception would be something like a high speed chase where inocent lives could be at stake.

This just showed a lack of respect for law enforcement and our judicial system in general. What she should have done is surrendered the duck peacefully. And then challenged it in court.

That is the way the system is supposted to work

I'm just wondering where you get that idea, BW?

Anyone can just walk away at anytime. It just takes a little self control. Police officers do it all the time. Remember WTO? They can walk away from that, but not a lady with a duck? Just because the officers aren't shown "respect" doesn't mean they have to pursue an issue to the end. Just imagine what it would be like if officers pursued anyone that didn't show them the "proper" respect.