Pete Thomas Outdoors

How to keep hunters from hunting on our property?

In support of the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and its effort to keep hunters and anglers informed, Pete Thomas Outdoors, on Thursday or Friday, posts marine biologist Carrie Wilson's weekly California Outdoors Q&A column:

Question: Our church owns about 700 acres in the foothills of Northern California. We recently had someone shoot at a 6-point buck, wound it, and screech away off the property. We called the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), who sent out a tracker. They followed the trail of blood but never found the wounded animal.

Meanwhile, we have many deer that reside on our property and we are vegetarians. We do not shoot the deer and they wander freely on the property. You can walk within maybe 20 feet of even these majestic big bucks and they won’t flee. We do not want people shooting the animals on our property.

The Fish and Wildlife person who came out told us it was legal for people to shoot the deer on our property unless we fenced it or posted signs (such as “POSTED NO HUNTING”) all over the property. Is this really true? For one thing, it isn’t even hunting season (with a firearm, which this was), and second, it’s private property and we’ve not given written permission to anyone to hunt on our property.

We also don’t want to post “NO TRESPASSING” signs because we welcome the public to visit our beautiful community with 85 homes and a number of businesses, including a school.

Can you help me understand what the law states, and what we must do to allow the public on our land but disallow hunting (and fishing) on our land? (Church Administrator)

Answer: Hunters do not need permission to hunt on private property unless the land is under cultivation, enclosed by a fence, or posted in accordance with Fish and Game Code, section 2016. This section requires that signs “forbidding trespass or hunting, or both are displayed at intervals not less than three to the mile along all exterior boundaries and at all roads and trails entering those lands,” and “signs may be of any size and wording that will fairly advise persons about to enter…that the use of the land is so restricted.”

Did game warden have the right to search my car?

In support of the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and its effort to keep hunters and anglers informed, Pete Thomas Outdoors, on Thursday or Friday, posts marine biologist Carrie Wilson's weekly California Outdoors Q&A column:

Question: I was out fishing at Lake McSwain. A man was there before me but didn’t catch anything. I got lucky and caught two trout right away, then decided to go try out a different spot. I was planning on doing a whole day of fishing and didn’t want the two fishes to spoil, so I gave them to the man that had not caught any. As I was leaving, a game warden showed up. I told him I caught two but gave them away because I’m heading to a different spot. He wanted to search my car and I let him because I didn’t have anything to hide. After not finding anything, he then told me those two fish count towards my bag limit so I can only catch three more, even if I move to a different spot. Now my question is, does he really have the right to search my car just like that, and is it correct that I can only catch three more fish after I gave those two away? What happened to the five fish in possession regulation? (Anonymous)

Answer: Good question, but the game warden was correct. No more than one daily bag limit may be taken or possessed by any one person (California Code of Regulations Title 14, section 1.17). There is a difference between the bag limit (the number you can take per day) and the possession limit (the maximum number you can have in your possession). Just because you gave two fish away, this did not set the slate back to zero so that you could take five additional fish that day.

As far as the request to search your vehicle, any officer can ask for your consent to inspect a vehicle. Your question indicates you “let him” inspect your car because you had nothing to hide. This was perfectly legal.

Whether an officer has the authority to conduct an inspection when consent is not given depends upon the specific circumstances of the contact. Wildlife officers have extensive inspection authorities that are unique to their jobs. For example, it is a crime to refuse to show an wildlife officer “… all licenses, tags, and the birds, mammals, fish, reptiles or amphibians taken or otherwise dealt with under this code, and any device or apparatus designed to be, and capable of being, used to take birds, mammals, fish, reptiles, or amphibians” (Fish and Game Code, section 2012). Also, wildlife officers are authorized to inspect all receptacles, except the clothing actually worn by a person at the time of inspection, where birds, mammals, fish, reptiles, or amphibians may be stored or placed (FGC, section 1006).

Q: Can I challenge the Hunter Education exam to get my license? (Mark L.)

Should Melissa Bachman be banned from South Africa for shooting a lion?

A hunting show star who used social media to share a photo of herself posing with a lion she killed in South Africa has sparked outrage among animal rights advocates who want to have her banned from returning to the country.

Melissa Bachman, host of Winchester Deadly Passion, killed the male lion during a recent guided hunt facilitated by the Maroi Conservancy in Limpopo province. (The hunt was legal.)

The photo was shared more than 1,000 times on Bachman's Facebook page, and in the past week it has circulated in the mainstream, generating harsh criticism.

According to ABC News, Cape Town resident Elan Burman began a Change.org petition requesting that the South African government prevent her from visiting.

The petition, which has gained nearly 15,000 signatures, reads: "She is an absolute contradiction to the culture of conservation this country prides itself on. As tax payers we demand she no longer be granted access to this country and its natural resources."

Big-game hunting in South Africa is big business, and part of the revenue generated through hunting helps fund conservation projects. Bachman, whose Facebook page includes photos of many other types of trophy animals, is no stranger to controversy. But the hunting celebrity enjoys lots of support.

The "Show Support for Melissa Bachman and resist anti-hunting abuse" Facebook page has nearly 8,000 followers.

The Maroi Conservancy also has been barraged with criticism. On Saturday it stated its motto, "Conservation through sustainable hunting" on its Facebook page, accompanied by a lengthy defense of its hunting program.

Part of it reads: "We do ethical hunting and all meat from animals hunted is distributed to the local community. Funds generated from hunting goes towards fixing the border fence that was washed away in the 2013 floods, combating poaching, which is excessive in this area due to close proximity to Zimbabwe, and running a sustainable conservancy."

Another segment reads: "We are not apologizing for facilitating the [Bachman] hunt. If you are not a game farmer and struggling with dying starving animals, poaching, and no fences in place to protect your animals and crop, please refrain from making negative derogatory comments."

Bachman did not kill the lion on Maroi Conservancy land. Maroi merely arranged the hunt, in Zeerust in Northwest Province, through another outfitter.

–Pete Thomas, via GrindTv

–Photos showing Melissa Bachman posing with trophy lion are from her Facebook page

Legal to use compound bows to take bullfrogs?

In support of the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and its effort to keep hunters and anglers informed, Pete Thomas Outdoors, on Thursday or Friday, posts marine biologist Carrie Wilson's weekly California Outdoors Q&A column:

Question: In the regulations it says it’s legal to use bow and arrow to take bullfrogs. Does this mean we are also allowed to take them using compound bows? (J. Riggs)

Answer: Yes, compound bows are a kind of bow, so you can use them to take bullfrogs. Bowfishing for bullfrogs will also require you to have a California sport fishing license.  Amphibians may be taken only by hand, hand-held dip net, or hook and line, except bullfrogs may also be taken by lights, spears, gigs, grabs, paddles, bow and arrow or fishing tackle (California Code of Regulations Title 14, section 5.05(e)). Since there are some protected frog species that may coexist with bullfrogs, please be sure you are correctly identifying your frog as a bullfrog, Rana (Lithobates) cataesbeiana, before releasing your arrow!


Q: I live in Lake Tahoe on the California side, and hope to tag my first buck this fall. If I have a successful hunt, is it legal to take the buck to our favorite butcher who happens to be just across state line in Incline, Nevada? Or, would I need to find a butcher in California to help process the animal? (Scott Y., Lake Tahoe)

What is deemed to be wanton waste by a hunter?

In support of the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and its effort to keep hunters and anglers informed, Pete Thomas Outdoors, on Thursday or Friday, posts marine biologist Carrie Wilson's weekly California Outdoors Q&A column:

Question: Is there a place in the regulations that talks about what I’ve heard hunters call “want and waste”? Can you point me in the right direction for the regulations if such a regulation even exists? The question comes up because my hunting partners and I often argue about what is and is not considered edible on a deer. Could I get a ticket because I do not eat the lungs or the liver or heart? Some people I know feel the ribs are not even worth eating. What is the definition of waste? I’ve heard someone say 30 percent can be left in the field but I’ve never seen what the regs say about the specifics of what you could possibly get a ticket for not taking home to eat. (Anonymous)

Answer: In California, hunters must make reasonable efforts to retrieve edible portions of game birds and game mammals. After a hunter has harvested an animal, the law requires that no portion of the flesh usually eaten by humans can be left, either through carelessness or neglect, to go needlessly to waste. Harvesting any deer and detaching or removing from the carcass only the head, hide, antlers or horns while leaving edible parts to needlessly go to waste, is deemed to be “wanton waste” and the hunter can be cited (Fish and Game Code, section 4304). The intent of the law is to prevent trophy hunting and to stop people from taking animals just for mounts.


Q: Why it is illegal to keep Dungeness crabs from San Francisco Bay? (Judy K.)

Any regulations regarding target shooting next to a wetland?

In support of the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and its effort to keep hunters and anglers informed, Pete Thomas Outdoors, on Thursday or Friday, posts marine biologist Carrie Wilson's weekly California Outdoors Q&A column:

Question: I was walking the Yolo Bypass Levee north of I-80 this weekend and saw a group shooting from the levee at some targets that were placed right next to the slough and adjacent wetlands to the east. If waterfowl hunters are required to use nonlead shot to prevent incidental lead poisoning, shouldn’t target shooters firing where their shot will enter the wetland also have to use nonlead shot?

It was also disappointing to see a lot of spent shells, clay target debris and glass left all over the ground. Is there any particular regulation prohibiting this? Thanks, (Beckye S.)

Answer: California Fish and Wildlife laws don’t prohibit the use of lead ammunition for target shooting, but they do prohibit people from depositing garbage, shells, glass, etc. within 150 feet of state waters (Fish and Game Code, section 5652.) If you see this again, please call CalTip at 888-334-2258 and report it.

Q: Is it legal to drop Dungeness crab gear prior to opening day? I’ve heard it’s legal to drop gear the day or night before opening day to let it soak overnight. I looked in the Ocean Sport Fishing Regulations booklet but couldn’t find anything indicating whether this is legal or not. If it is legal, how long before opening day can it be dropped? And how early can it be retrieved? (Fred S.)

Is it legal to fish for manta rays in California?

In support of the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and its effort to keep hunters and anglers informed, Pete Thomas Outdoors, on Thursday or Friday, posts marine biologist Carrie Wilson's weekly California Outdoors Q&A column:

Question: Is it legal to fish for manta rays in California, specifically in the San Francisco Bay area? (Gina T.)

Answer: Manta rays are generally not found off California, and since they are filter feeders, it may be difficult to persuade one to take your bait. The northernmost limit of their range in the eastern Pacific Ocean is around San Diego, where they are only spotted occasionally. However, if a manta ray were to stray farther north, then yes, it may be legally taken by hook and line off California. I suspect you instead may be referring to bat rays which are more widely distributed and caught fairly regularly on hook and line. If so, they too are legal to take.

Q: Please verify for me the catch limit on California lizardfish. My understanding is the limit is 10 fish/species with a total bag limit of 20 fish of all species. Right? I don’t see this species mentioned as one of the “no limit” species. Lizardfish are being caught 4-5 at a time on the piers on the Central Coast and someone is telling the anglers there is no limit, so keep all you catch. (Rose H., Santa Barbara)

A: You are correct. A bag limit of up to 10 lizardfish per angler is allowed. There are no size or season restrictions for these fish though.

Q: I’ve inherited a white polar bear rug that has been in the family for 30-40 years. I have no papers or receipts for it. Can I still sell it? (Christian P., Tulare)

Legal to hunt deer from a boat drifting down a river?

In support of the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and its effort to keep hunters and anglers informed, Pete Thomas Outdoors, on Thursday or Friday, posts marine biologist Carrie Wilson's weekly California Outdoors Q&A column:

Question: Is it legal to hunt deer from a boat drifting down a river? If so, what are the parameters? Do you have to be a certain distance from shore? (Eric S., Redding)

Answer: The main requirement when hunting from a boat is that the boat cannot be under power or still moving as a result of power. In addition, engines must be shut off and out of the water. Once you’ve done this, the boat may be drifting, beached, moored, resting at anchor, or propelled by paddle, oar or pole.

Aside from the requirements of using the boat as a platform, the shooter must consider what else may be around and beyond the deer. You cannot hunt or shoot a firearm within 150 yards of an occupied dwelling, or hunt on private property or within prohibited areas such as municipalities. It is important to research your specific hunting area and know legal access points. No person shall pursue, drive, herd or take any bird or mammal from any type of motor-driven air or land vehicles, motorboat, airboat, sailboat or snowmobile (California Code of Regulations Title 14, section 251). There may also be some Penal Code restrictions regarding loaded firearms in vehicles.

Q: My dad is handicapped and someone told him if he gets a license and abalone report card, he can then have someone else catch abalone for him and hand it to him either while he’s on a boat or once back on shore. Is this true? (Janet R., Sacramento)

What are the regulations regarding hunting from the beach?

In support of the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and its effort to keep hunters and anglers informed, Pete Thomas Outdoors, on Thursday or Friday, posts marine biologist Carrie Wilson's weekly California Outdoors Q&A column:

Question: I’ve heard deer and elk are occasionally spotted on a beach in a remote area of Northern California. This beach stretches for several miles and I’m planning to hike it beginning from a public access point. During deer and elk season, what are the regulations regarding hunting from the beach? I will have a harvest tag for the appropriate area and know not to shoot over water or within 150 yards of a dwelling. I believe the State of California owns everything from the mean high tide water line out to three miles, so if it were a low tide, and a deer or elk happened to be below the mean high tide line, could I technically take a shot? Although it’s not likely this scenario would occur, I am curious about the legal and ethical nature of this scenario. (Katie H.)

Answer: There are no California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) laws prohibiting this, but there could be local firearms closures in place. To determine if firearms or archery equipment would be legal to possess and use in the area you’re interested in hunting, you should contact the local sheriff (if an unincorporated area) or the local police department (if an incorporated area) to confirm. Also, these beaches may very likely be managed by either State Parks (where hunting is prohibited) or Bureau of Land Management (who may have restrictions on hunting near trails, camps and beaches). Therefore, you should also contact the local agency having jurisdiction over where you plan to hunt to be sure hunting is authorized there.


Q: If we are fishing on a boat in Monterey, how many fishing rods are allowed? If we already have rockcod aboard, do I need to use one rod? Can I use two rods to target lingcod or halibut if we don’t have rockcod? Can I still use a second rod for bait fishing if rockcod are aboard? (Kenual L.)

Can a pet store rescue and re-home a garter snake?

In support of the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and its effort to keep hunters and anglers informed, Pete Thomas Outdoors, on Thursday or Friday, posts marine biologist Carrie Wilson's weekly California Outdoors Q&A column:

Question: We own a pet store in Northern California and also help to rescue animals and then place them in suitable homes. A client recently asked us to help rescue a 12-year-old garter snake and then adopt it out back to a good home. My questions are, is it even legal for us to possess a garter snake within our shop? Next, if we are able to possess it in our shop, can we charge our standard adoption fees to a new owner for our services in order to help place this snake in a new home? (Anonymous)

Answer: If the garter snake is native to California, then it is not legal to sell or even possess within the pet store. According to California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) Wildlife Officer Kyle Chang, it would also not be legal to charge a fee to rehome the garter snake since they are not on the list of snakes that are legal to “sell” in California, and “sell” includes possession for sale, barter, exchange or trade. Pet shops can only sell snakes under certain conditions. It’s also not legal for anyone to release the snake back into the wild. (California Code of Regulations Title 14, sections 40(c), 40(e), 43(c), 43(c)(1), 43(f)(2) and Fish and Game Code section 75 all apply to this answer.)

If, however, the garter snake is non-native to California, then CDFW regulations do not apply (except for the illegal release of the garter snake into the wild), but all other state, county and city laws relating to the pet trade may still apply.


Q: Can you discuss ocean fish possession limits? I often see people coming to our area to fish for several days in a row and they take a limit every day without eating or gifting any of the fish to someone else. On day three, when they depart from the ocean, they have three limits of rockfish in a cooler. It’s not right. Most folks do not know or understand that the daily bag limit is also the possession limit for most fish. Just a thought to help educate. Thanks! (Ryan H., San Luis Obispo)