Full-day K worth Jessamine taxpayers' dollars

Comment by Shark88: Friday, September 3

Ms. Dragomir, you can donate from your own personal funds to help the schools out. It is a free co...read more...

Fiscal court buys Nicholasville Cafe building

Comment by Shark88: Friday, September 3

So the state is forcing the county to build a justice center? When does that have to be built?...read more...

Defending First Amendment rights different from endorsing message

Comment by tweldon: Thursday, September 2

For weeks I have grown so accustomed to writing acerbic retorts to Leland Conway’s columns with wh...read more...

» Read more recent story comments
» Register for your account

Mark Tucker’s legal problem with the Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources isn’t an uncommon one, he said.

Tucker, 50, who is a candidate for Jessamine County judge-executive, paid a $773 fine last month connected with his guilty plea for illegally buying and importing wild turkeys.

But the Jessamine County man said he was bringing in the birds for his own consumption and he had no plans to release them into the wild.

“I purchased some turkeys, six of which were a strain, not the same strain that we have here (Kentucky), but a strain of Eastern Wildlife turkey,” he said. “I went ahead and bought them, raised them and ate some of them, and one of them was killed by a raccoon, and the other three were picked up by fish and wildlife after they subpoenaed me.”

Tucker’s argument is that turkeys — he purchased his from the Iowa-based Murray McMurray Hatchery — should be considered livestock, not wildlife.

“The law currently states that if you import wildlife from another state, it’s illegal,” he said. “But I considered these livestock, not wildlife.”

Tucker said he considered fighting the charges, but facing a possible $12,000 fine, he opted to pay the $733.

“So I was looking at $1,000 per count, but I was looking at 12 different counts: six for importing and six for having them in my possession,” he said. “They said if I fought it, they (fish and wildlife) would go for the full $12,000 fine, so they bullied me into a smaller fine.”

Tucker called what happened to him a case of a government agency out of control, and he called state Rep. Bob Damron.

Legislators troubled by fish and wildlife

Damron said Tucker’s complaint isn’t uncommon across the commonwealth, and currently the general assembly is looking into ways to put more control on fish and wildlife.

“This is a story that we hear a lot from sportsmen around the state with problems with fish and wildlife in a very aggressive effort by them and their conservation officers,” Damron said. “It’s to the point where there are two or three bills that deal with fish and wildlife and trying to get them back under control so that they will follow the same rules and guidelines that every other agency does that has police powers.”

Damron said he is very concerned with the fact that fish and wildlife is able to keep some money from the fines, something that no other police agency in the state can do.

“One thing we found on all of our research on fish and wildlife is that they are the only police agency that actually gets to keep a portion of the fine,” he said. “If they fine you $1,000 for a violation, then they get to keep 60 percent of that fine, and it goes back into their resources. So there is an incentive for them to fine. I thought we’d done away with that; I mean, we don’t let the Nicholasville Police Department keep part of the speeding fines on speeders caught around the bypass.

“A lot of (General Assembly) members have had a lot of problems with fish and wildlife,” Damron added.

Damron plans on introducing a bill in the coming weeks to put more control on that state agency

Story comments

No comments on this article yet.

Posting comments on this web site requires free registration.

• Create your account
• Log in to your account