Father and Son Elk Poachers Get 10-Day Jail Sentences and a Lot More

The apple apparently doesn’t fall far from the corner-cutting tree in this family. According to the Reno Gazette Journal, a father and son from Wisconsin are in a White Pine County, Nevada jail and their hunting guide has been suspended for illegally taking an elk.

The three men were sentenced this week in District Court in Ely, according to the Nevada Department of Wildlife.

Edwin Singler, 55, of Shiocton, Wis., and Ryan Singler, 26, of New London, Wis., began serving their 10-day sentences immediately after sentencing and guide Tyler Brunson, 23, of McGill, lost his privileges for three years.

I wonder what mom thinks of her boys…and what they’ve done to the family bank account. The good news: she won’t have to worry about them doing anything wrong while hunting again any time soon.

In addition to 10 days of jail the Singler men received 270-day suspended sentences, a combined $15,000 in fines and penalties, 40 hours of community service, forfeited a rifle, scope and the elk, and lost hunting privileges for six years in Nevada and 46 other states that recognize a Nevada revocation.

“This is such a senseless crime,” said Scott Giles, the game warden who led the investigation in Nevada. “These individuals had a valid tag in that area, but because they felt the rules did not apply to them they wound up receiving some pretty steep fines and penalties.”

The investigation started in spring of 2016 when game wardens in Wisconsin contacted authorities in Nevada to report evidence they found in a separate investigation that suggested a possible illegal elk killing in Nevada.

“They ran across the possibility that Ryan Singler actually killed an elk in Nevada his father, Edwin, had the tag for,” Giles said.

The killing happened during guided hunt in near the Schell Creek Range scheduled for 10 days beginning November 25, 2015, according to the Nevada Department of Wildlife.

The area is known for producing large elk and guided hunts can cost several thousand dollars.

So they’d spent a bunch of money on the hunt and didn’t want to go away empty-handed.

According to Giles’ report on the case, the group spent three days in cold weather hunting but couldn’t find a suitable bull.

Based on an interview with Brunson, the report stated both Edwin and Ryan Singler were upset and complained about not hiking around as they did when hunting in Wisconsin.

According to the report, when the group did start hiking the Singlers complained about the altitude and Edwin Singler vomited.

Obviously, what happens in Vegas does not apply in all parts of Nevada.

Eventually, the group spotted an elk and gave chase. Neither Brunson nor another guide saw Ryan Singler shoot the elk but during the investigation Brunson told Giles that on the first day of the hunt Edwin Singler asked if it would be ok for Ryan Singler to shoot the bull and that it would “stay between everyone in the room,” Giles’ report stated.

Wisconsin authorities recovered further evidence including photos and messages in which Ryan Singler admitted he shot the elk despite not having drawn the tag.

Giles was able to confirm the location of the kill because photos recovered during the investigation showed Mt. Wheeler in the background.

It was nice of the Singlers to document their poaching activity so completely for the game warden, wasn’t it?

Authorities issued arrest warrants in April 2017 and the men pleaded guilty to the charges earlier this week.

Giles said the penalties show the importance of staying within the law when hunting in Nevada.

This could have been a great father son experience, Instead they decided to be poachers and it cost them both. Bigly.

comments

  1. avatar rocketscientist says:

    so the dad had the tag but he wanted his son to take the shot? if this is the case, and they were hunting as a group, I really COULD CARE LESS and I would love to hear why this is a big deal that requires jail time. they bought a tag and filled it. victimless crime. state got their tag money, and the tag was used. if they were hunting in a group who really cares? this is a sternly worded lecture if anything by the game warden, and nothing more IMO. There has to be cases of actual poaching (where nobody has a tag) that these bored game wardens can chase down right?

    1. avatar Boris Badenov says:

      I’m not a hunter but I do shoot and I absolutely agree, this case is PURE BULL$HIT. One family, one tag, one Elk. What problem, besides states padding their pockets.

    2. avatar anonymous says:

      if they were hunting in a group who really cares?

      Oh people are caring! LOL Just read the comments below.

      What problem, besides states padding their pockets.

      The problem is their opinion of what you are doing. That’s the problem. How dare you play the system to take a deer? Penalty time b****.

  2. avatar rt66paul says:

    This is a case of poaching, pure and simple. It is not like someone without money taking a second deer of the year for food. If you want to trophy hunt, the bills need to be paid. I have no sympathy for someone trying to cheat the system here, while I can understand someone taking another deer to keep him/her in meat for a couple of months.

    1. avatar Hannibal says:

      Is it? If person A has the tag but person B- who is with him- takes the shot with his permission, who cares? Who loses out there? The correct number of animals have been taken (1), the license is fulfilled. Where is it necessary to throw people in jail and fine them thousands and thousands of dollars?

      am I reading this wrong or is it really that officious and stupid a case?

      1. avatar Anymouse says:

        Not all tags get filled, and the state takes historical success rates into account for how many tags get issued. From a population management standpoint, if A and B are standing together, it doesn’t matter is A or B fires. If they both fire, they have a higher chance of hitting the animal and fulfilling the tag. If A and B are not together (as in this case), they’ve doubled the area they’re covering and are more likely to find an animal and fill a tag.
        From a fairness side, A and B could be unfairly increasing their chances and denying other hunters an equal chance at getting a tag. B hunts, and has 3 family members that don’t. A, B , C, and D all apply to an area that does a drawing for tags. B takes the tag winner with him and pulls the trigger. B has quadrupled his chance of getting a tag and may get multiple tags. Not a big deal if the area allows someone to enter multiple times or get multiple tags, but it’s unfair where 1 person-1 tag-1 entry is the rule.

        1. avatar Hannibal says:

          Somehow that theoretical impact does not seem to fit the punishment here.

        2. avatar rocketscientist says:

          Look I can see your point if the hunters separate and cover double the area and then the person who sees an animal makes the shot…that would seem to go against the spirit of the rule…but if they are both together with a guide, and only 1 person shoots(and the guide verifies only 1 shot), what is the problem exactly? And certainly the punishment does not fit the crime. this is some really insane stuff IMO.

      2. avatar anonymous says:

        Is it? If person A has the tag but person B- who is with him- takes the shot with his permission, who cares? Who loses out there?

        rt66paul is losing out! He wants the state to have those funds! Now pay up! Nevermind the result is the same! Pay up!

    2. avatar anonymous says:

      This is a case of poaching, pure and simple. It is not like someone without money taking a second deer of the year for food. If you want to trophy hunt, the bills need to be paid. I have no sympathy for someone trying to cheat the system here, while I can understand someone taking another deer to keep him/her in meat for a couple of months.

      LOL! OMFG!

      First Statement above: I find this form of poaching acceptable. Reasons? None.
      Second Statement above: This example above is poaching! And I have no sympathy for someone cheating the system! Reasons? None.

      I’m crack’in up here.

  3. avatar Mack Bolan says:

    That is some nonsensical government bullshit right there.

  4. avatar Alex Waits says:

    –“These individuals had a valid tag in that area, but because they felt the rules did not apply to them they wound up receiving some pretty steep fines and penalties.”–

    So if I’m reading this correctly, the son filled the fathers tag? No extra animals harvested, elk taken in the proper zone or wma? No illegal hunting practice (baiting, dogs, stalking etc..)? Tag was paid, hunting license paid? The only discrepancy is that the shooters tag was in his dads pocket?

    And the penalty is 10 days of jail, $15,000 in fines and penalties, 40 hours of community service, forfeited a rifle, scope, and the elk, and lost hunting privileges for six years in Nevada.. And your OK with this Ms. Austin? This level of asset forfeiture for a regulatory infraction? I’d understand forfeiture of the elk and suspending hunting privileges, but the rest is insane.

    Maybe if they were making it an industry of it, or running illegal hunts with no tags at all, something…anything that makes sense for this level of punishment, but this, this is just shameful.. and for the tone of your writing to celebrate it?

  5. avatar Thunderkawk says:

    Stupid story. How many babies were killed today? Who the fuck cares about a rat with hooves? Hunting “privleges” DNR are worse than thugs and a waste of tax payer money as well as good oxygen.

    1. avatar anonymous says:

      You offended the state! You offended the majority! Prison time for you!

  6. avatar Anymouse says:

    Party hunting, like baiting, is legal in some states. In this case, it’s not legal in NV, and they apparently knew it.
    The states take success rates into account when issuing tags. Breaking the rules to give yourself an advantage removes more animals and disrupts the game department’s sustainability model.

    1. avatar Hannibal says:

      yeeeeah okay but over a week in jail with a 270-day suspended sentence over their head and 15,000 in fines + all those other costs?

      I regularly see people who have seriously assaulted others get much less penalty than that.

    2. avatar Ralph says:

      “The states take success rates into account when issuing tags.”

      That’s government for ya. Selling a bunch of high-priced permission slips knowing that many people are going to get nothing for their money.

  7. avatar Geoff PR says:

    “…and 46 other states that recognize a Nevada revocation.”

    Now *that’s* harsh…

  8. avatar Larry says:

    Poachers don’t stop because you take their license lol .

  9. avatar Ralph says:

    This is what happens when you kill the King’s elk. Because everything belongs to the King, and the King can do no wrong.

    1. avatar Robert A says:

      That’s right, all the game belongs to the King, he just lets the peasants take a bit now and then.

  10. avatar Slick says:

    This isn’t poaching. This is two people getting fucked by a stupid law. Dad had a tag, dad approved of junior taking the shot, what is the fucking problem?

    Like Ralph said, King’s elk indeed….

    1. avatar PATRON49IFT says:

      Right on! Sucks for the father and son. Yet another example of government agencies run amok and not answerable to the general public.

  11. avatar ironicatbest says:

    Well that shore the fuck ain’t poaching. Poaching is when I drive around with ole”spot” and shoot em off posted property. Then there’s two kinds of poaching, one for food and one for horns. Fuck them horn hunters, that’s just wrong. My oldest son is a conservation officer and he’d have wrote them up, he’s a fair guy but “the law states”. He and I butt heads once in awhile

  12. avatar Big Bill says:

    Two thoughts:
    Hunting in most cases is a scientifically researched and applied in order to maintain a healthy number of a particular species. We all know that, in the vast majority of cases, many tags go unfilled.
    Does that mean that I can simply go hunting without a tag because I know that somewhere, there’s an unfilled tag? Of course not. The proximity of that unfilled tag means nothing.
    If my driving license is revoked for DUI, but I drive with my (licensed) brother in the car, is that OK? Same logic.

    This is not a “victimless” crime. (Forget the drivel about “The King’s Deer.”) The animals belong to the residents of the state. Those residents entrust the maintenance of those animals to the various game departments, whatever your state calls it. Those departments use scientific methods to determine what type of animal (does, bucks, antlerless) will be taken, and trhe duration of the hunting seasons, to determine how many tags will be issued. That number is designed to ensure that enough are taken to keep the herds manageable, but not so many that the animals suffer from too small a population.
    When people take it into their heads to fill an unfilled tag, just because it exists (proximity to the tag holder is not an issue at all), then the people of the state (society in general) is the victim.

    Rationalization to forgive a crime is often a case of, “Gee, I could see myself doing that, so it must not be wrong.” Or, “There but for the grace of God go I.”

  13. avatar Peter says:

    I will never visit this website again because of this article.

    1. avatar anonymous says:

      I’m going to poach some animals just because of this article.

  14. avatar Steven B. says:

    It’s Poaching for all you geniuses that don’t “get it”. The tags are based on the chances that the hunter that draws it will fill it. If 10 guys go hunting with one tag and the first shot wins…the % Elk taken per tag skyrockets. It’s that simple. The tag is for the one person that draws it……not for any bunch of a-holes to use until one of them get an Elk.

    1. avatar anonymous says:

      I’m going to poach a deer just because you said that. I’m going to dump a bucket of urine on the deer hide let it soak in, then scrape the hair off. I’m going to take the deer brain out and mash it into a soup and let the hide soak in it. Then I’m going to take the deer skin and rub it down with dog s*** and let it sit in dog s*** soup until soft and lays flat. Then i’m going to soak the thing in mashed oak bark. After it’s all done, I’m going to stamp into the leather the words “F*** deer permits.” and drape it over my recliner at home while eating a deer sausage and thinking of your comment.

      It’s Poaching for all you geniuses that don’t “get it”.

      Oh we “get it.” We know what this is all about.

  15. avatar Norm Walker says:

    Calling this poaching is a bit of a stretch. Here in Wisconsin hunting deer in a group is perfectly legal provided everyone is close together. It does sound like they knew this was not kosher in Nevada and they made a costly judgment call. I wouldn’t call this “poaching”.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email