Guide Guilty of Illegal Bighorn Hunt

OutdoorWriter

Long Time Member
Messages
8,340
Department of Justice
U.S. Attorney’s Office
District of New Mexico
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Thursday, December 9, 2021

Las Vegas man found guilty of illegally guiding hunt
in Carson National Forest

ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. – A federal court on Dec. 1 found Carlos Ortiz, 28, of Las Vegas, New Mexico, guilty of illegally guiding a bighorn sheep hunt in the Carson National Forest. On December 8, the court sentenced Ortiz to a year and a half of probation and fined him $7,600.

According to court records, on Aug. 7, 2020, Ortiz, doing business as Reaper Backcountry Outfitters, was guiding a party to hunt bighorn sheep. Though the itinerary for the hunt stated that it was to take place in the Santa Fe National Forest, the GPS coordinates included in the itinerary were located in the Carson National Forest.

Officers from the U.S. Forest Service and the New Mexico Department of Game and Fish encountered the party at their campsite in the Carson National Forest. The officers also had encountered two individuals on horseback who told officers they were helping Ortiz pack out a bighorn sheep killed by Ortiz’s client. The officers confirmed that the sheep had been killed in the Carson National Forest.

At the time, Ortiz was not authorized to conduct any commercial activity in the Carson National Forest and was not authorized to guide bighorn sheep hunts in the Santa Fe National Forest. Additionally, he was not authorized to conduct guided hunts with overnight camping in either forest.

“Those at the Forest Service and the New Mexico Department of Game and Fish who enforce our laws to protect and sustain our Nation’s forests and wildlife are stewards of our country’s rich and diverse natural heritage, which includes majestic animals like North America’s bighorn sheep,” said U.S. Attorney Fred Federici. “The U.S. Attorney’s Office is fully committed to enforcing our land and wildlife laws so that all Americans, including generations of Americans to come, can enjoy our Nation’s natural resources, and not those who attempt to profit by violating the law.”

“I am very pleased to see this conviction and sentence,” said Special Agent in Charge James Alford from the U.S. Forest Service Southwestern Region. “The national forests belong to every citizen and when someone is willfully violating the law it steals opportunities for others to enjoy our public lands. This is especially true in this case since an outfitter guide was breaking the law for commercial gain. I want to thank our U.S. Forest Service law enforcement officers, New Mexico Department of Game and Fish conservations officers, and Assistant U.S. Attorneys for their outstanding work of protecting America’s national forests and natural resources.”

“I want to thank the U.S. Forest Service law enforcement officers and Conservation Officers for their hard work on this case in New Mexico’s backcountry,” said Game and Fish Colonel Bobby Griego. “It is important for all New Mexico Outfitters to ensure they not only have completed requirements from the Game and Fish Department, but also our federal and state land management partners.”

The U.S. Forest Service and the New Mexico Department of Game and Fish investigated this case. Assistant U.S. Attorneys Louis Mattei and Rumaldo Armijo prosecuted the case.
 
I’m confused. Was he guiding illegally, or in the wrong unit, or did he just not have a permit from the USFS? Maybe all 3?

“At the time, Ortiz was not authorized to conduct any commercial activity in the Carson National Forest and was not authorized to guide bighorn sheep hunts in the Santa Fe National Forest. Additionally, he was not authorized to conduct guided hunts with overnight camping in either forest.”
 
I’m confused. Was he guiding illegally, or in the wrong unit, or did he just not have a permit from the USFS? Maybe all 3?

“At the time, Ortiz was not authorized to conduct any commercial activity in the Carson National Forest and was not authorized to guide bighorn sheep hunts in the Santa Fe National Forest. Additionally, he was not authorized to conduct guided hunts with overnight camping in either forest.”
I figure he doesn’t have a forestry permit. Kinda bs that guides get pigeoned holed like this. A law is a law though most of us follow them then there are the people that don’t. If he just guided the hunt without a license he’d be fine. Look at the homeless if I piss in an ally and get caught I get to be a sex offender if they do it no big deal.
 
I figure he doesn’t have a forestry permit. Kinda bs that guides get pigeoned holed like this. A law is a law though most of us follow them then there are the people that don’t. If he just guided the hunt without a license he’d be fine. Look at the homeless if I piss in an ally and get caught I get to be a sex offender if they do it no big deal.
The FS started an uproar here by citing people for commercial use of the USFS* road. For example, the gravel trucks hauling rock to my cabin. And presumably anyone else who drove a commercial vehicle over the public road.

*Sooooo, the county is suing the feds over who really ”owns” this historic road that’s been in service for WAY longer than the USFS has been around. The county also provides maintenance, although I don’t know if they have an MOU for that.

Finally, I had a buddy in PHX who was arrested for taking a leak in an alley behind a bar. The homeless dude next to the dumpster was an undercover cop.

He had to go to sex offender court. The female judge sentenced him to misdemeanor indecent exposure. She told him he would have done time if “he had been erect”. :ROFLMAO:
 
Finally, I had a buddy in PHX who was arrested for taking a leak in an alley behind a bar. The homeless dude next to the dumpster was an undercover cop.
________________________________________________________________________

Many years ago on patrol I was in the parking lot of a local bar noted for "local bad a$$es" drinking there. I was talking to a older couple who had stopped to ask me directions to a forest service campground to spend the night in their R.V.
While talking to them, I heard the woman suck wind and I looked in the direction she was staring. One of our local Indians was 25 feet away in front of the bar. He had whipped it out and was peeing in front of us. I knew that he saw us, and saw a cop and decided to test the cop to see what he would do. I yelled at him to zip it up and go in the bar and use the restroom.
He yelled back, fu#k you. He failed the attitude test with that. I arrested him for indecent exposure and drunk in public.
The D.A. denied the charge for indecent exposure with this statement on the denial form. "No indecent exposure, just a typical Indian taking a piss".
In CA. peeing in public is no longer a criminal violation.
RELH
 
The SF NF granted the permit and the outfitter was "good to go". Carson dropped the ball. The hunt took place in the SF and they transported across the Carson.

There is NO LAW stating you cannot traverse a section of land while conducting commerce elsewhere. That would be like saying the outfitter would have to get all the permits to travel from their place of business (their house) to the place of the hunt. Absurd to say the least...
 
$7600 is a damn expensive ticket. Ours for sticking an axe in a tree was only $25 or so.

There’s something else going on here.
 
The SF NF granted the permit and the outfitter was "good to go". Carson dropped the ball. The hunt took place in the SF and they transported across the Carson.

There is NO LAW stating you cannot traverse a section of land while conducting commerce elsewhere. That would be like saying the outfitter would have to get all the permits to travel from their place of business (their house) to the place of the hunt. Absurd to say the least...
“The officers confirmed that the sheep had been killed in the Carson National Forest.”
 
Finally, I had a buddy in PHX who was arrested for taking a leak in an alley behind a bar. The homeless dude next to the dumpster was an undercover cop.
________________________________________________________________________

Many years ago on patrol I was in the parking lot of a local bar noted for "local bad a$$es" drinking there. I was talking to a older couple who had stopped to ask me directions to a forest service campground to spend the night in their R.V.
While talking to them, I heard the woman suck wind and I looked in the direction she was staring. One of our local Indians was 25 feet away in front of the bar. He had whipped it out and was peeing in front of us. I knew that he saw us, and saw a cop and decided to test the cop to see what he would do. I yelled at him to zip it up and go in the bar and use the restroom.
He yelled back, fu#k you. He failed the attitude test with that. I arrested him for indecent exposure and drunk in public.
The D.A. denied the charge for indecent exposure with this statement on the denial form. "No indecent exposure, just a typical Indian taking a piss".
In CA. peeing in public is no longer a criminal violation.
RELH
I gave a ride to a hippy couple back in the 70s from southern CO to Denver. They were pleasant, did'nt stink and did not smell of patchouli oil. I think they were from Denmark.

Anyway (this was back before Denver and Pueblo were almost one) the dude has to pee. So, I pulled over in the parking lot of a gas station just off I-25 to fill up. The dude walks over to a grassy median, whoops it out and commences to pee. As he is watching traffic go by.

FWIW, my last time in Japan (2003 or so) is partially filled with urine smell in almost every ally way. Sailors and locals.
 
"At the time, Ortiz was not authorized to conduct any commercial activity in the Carson National Forest and was not authorized to guide bighorn sheep hunts in the Santa Fe National Forest. Additionally, he was not authorized to conduct guided hunts with overnight camping in either forest".

I'm kinda slow. But it sounds like he wasn't allowed to guide a sheep hunt in either forest. He also can't camp in either as well? So, "allegedly" he's guilty of doing both.
Did he forget to fill out another form, and pay NMFS an extra fee, so he would have been allowed t do so?
 
This is USFS not State land, best I can tell from the limited info.

Do guides need a permit to camp on the forest? Hazardous waste endorsement for a chitter?

My $8 Christmas tree permit was executed on a 4-part form with a copy to DC, so it wouldn’t surprise me.
 
This is USFS not State land, best I can tell from the limited info.

Do guides need a permit to camp on the forest? Hazardous waste endorsement for a chitter?

My $8 Christmas tree permit was executed on a 4-part form with a copy to DC, so it wouldn’t surprise me.
I’ve got a buddy who is an outfitter in NM, he said he has been trying to get a permit on the Carson NF for years. Maybe they only give out so many or you have to line the right pockets?
 
This is USFS not State land, best I can tell from the limited info.

Do guides need a permit to camp on the forest? Hazardous waste endorsement for a chitter?

My $8 Christmas tree permit was executed on a 4-part form with a copy to DC, so it wouldn’t surprise me.
If it is like Colo., an outfitter has to have a permit to work in a specific area of any federal land. They often designate where the camps have to be, as well, especially if there are horses involved.

The oufitter I worked for in CO had USFS permits for hunting in two separate areas -- Hermosa Creek area near the Purgatory ski resort & in the Weminuche Wilderness -- but both were within the San Juan NF. We also had a permit for a summer camp in the Weminuche.

As mentioned, they allow only so many COMMERCIAL outfitter permits. Usually, the only way to get one now is to buy out someone who already has one or to inherit it.
 
And that 'issue' is the outfitter in question likely didn't have any of the necessary permits I outlined in my last reply.
While you were busy hunting and fishing and goofing around ;), I was getting the FAR’s shoved up my butt by the goobermint. Federal regulations aren’t intuitively obvious, and can be administered by difficult people. There is a reason they get charged $500 for a toilet seat.

Before I invest any more energy, can anyone establish whether the sheep was taken under a proper license, and in the correct unit? Was the hunter cited for anything?
 
in ca. one violation of any kind you lose your guide lic. for ever, so when I want to know what the rules are I ask my brother who is a guide and he knows the rules without fail. Another friend with a lobster lic. lost it for one violation, another friends father died and my friend inherited a swordfish drift net permit of only 3 left in the state and he didnt want it now there are only 2. The guide in this case probably made more than his fine and will be back next year, he just needs cell service for one and a half year, if he did not know the rules he does now.
 
While you were busy hunting and fishing and goofing around ;), I was getting the FAR’s shoved up my butt by the goobermint. Federal regulations aren’t intuitively obvious, and can be administered by difficult people. There is a reason they get charged $500 for a toilet seat.

Before I invest any more energy, can anyone establish whether the sheep was taken under a proper license, and in the correct unit? Was the hunter cited for anything?
I would think most outfitters are quite in tune with what they need to do business on federal land -- a permit specific to the area & insurance.

I couldn't find it anywhere, but my guess is the hunter was good to go. In fact, he might not have even known anything about it when the hunt took place.
 
I found a few more answers to some questions posed here in this news article;


Horniac
 
In a somewhat similar case...

I was watching the AZ commission meeting yesterday. An outfitter had his guide's license suspended for 5 years for falsifying his guide's report.

That charge came about because he took hunters into a USFS area he didn't have a permit for & then decided to omit those hunters on his annual report.
 
I would think most outfitters are quite in tune with what they need to do business on federal land -- a permit specific to the area & insurance.

I couldn't find it anywhere, but my guess is the hunter was good to go. In fact, he might not have even known anything about it when the hunt took place.
As we should have known, an enhanced sentence for another frequent flier.

When the hunter is cool and just the guide gets fingered, you can sorta figure “it’s part of an ongoing investigation”.
 
If it is like Colo., an outfitter has to have a permit to work in a specific area of any federal land. They often designate where the camps have to be, as well, especially if there are horses involved.

The oufitter I worked for in CO had USFS permits for hunting in two separate areas -- Hermosa Creek area near the Purgatory ski resort & in the Weminuche Wilderness -- but both were within the San Juan NF. We also had a permit for a summer camp in the Weminuche.

As mentioned, they allow only so many COMMERCIAL outfitter permits. Usually, the only way to get one now is to buy out someone who already has one or to inherit it.
We should circle back to this.

I can sorta see restricting outfitters in an unlimited OTC unit, but I don’t think that’s the USFS’s job. I believe the number of hunters and outfitters should be regulated by the state’s DOW, not by some pencil pushing clerk.
 
We should circle back to this.

I can sorta see restricting outfitters in an unlimited OTC unit, but I don’t think that’s the USFS’s job. I believe the number of hunters and outfitters should be regulated by the state’s DOW, not by some pencil pushing clerk.
In a world without boundaries, that might be the better way to go, but...

The STATE cannot make or enforce rules on FEDERAL land that address the use of that land. All the G&F cops can do is regulate when & how someone can hunt or fish on that land. The feds could close down access to any one NF & the G&F people couldn't do a thing about it.

That said, the permit system the USFS uses is in place for a couple reasons. For one, it's meant to prevent over-crowding. Just use the Weminuche for example; if any outfitter could just go in & set up a camp, it would have a bunch of then tripping over each other. Another reason is to protect the environment from being destroyed, especially where horses are involved. That's one reason they assign a specific camp area to use every year. That way the damage is relegated to that one area.

But then you already knew all that... ;)
 
As we should have known, an enhanced sentence for another frequent flier.

When the hunter is cool and just the guide gets fingered, you can sorta figure “it’s part of an ongoing investigation”.
I can't ever recall asking an outfitter if he had a permit for the NF we were hunting. I would think most hunters feel it's a given that their outfitter is doing everything legally. In fact, I bet most hunters aren't even aware of the permit/insurance mandate.

So what I'm saying is the guy might have hunted & killed his sheep but didn't realize the problem until the FS guys confronted them. And actually if his sheep tag was for that unit, he killed it legally.
 
“But Ortiz said that’s not what happened. He said that they killed the sheep in the Santa Fe National Forest and had carried it into the Carson National Forest.”

Totally believable. That’s usually what most folks do. Haul an animal over the next ridge to gut it out and quarter it up. How did he even say that with a straight face?
 
“But Ortiz said that’s not what happened. He said that they killed the sheep in the Santa Fe National Forest and had carried it into the Carson National Forest.”

Totally believable. That’s usually what most folks do. Haul an animal over the next ridge to gut it out and quarter it up. How did he even say that with a straight face?
995FB9A1-8937-4683-8A19-5AEE29695E00.jpeg
 
"At the time, Ortiz was not authorized to conduct any commercial activity in the Carson National Forest and was not authorized to guide bighorn sheep hunts in the Santa Fe National Forest. Additionally, he was not authorized to conduct guided hunts with overnight camping in either forest".

I'm kinda slow. But it sounds like he wasn't allowed to guide a sheep hunt in either forest. He also can't camp in either as well? So, "allegedly" he's guilty of doing both.
Did he forget to fill out another form, and pay NMFS an extra fee, so he would have been allowed t do so?
Outfitter said he received his green light permit from the SF. He was authorized to guide and outfit in the SF.

Paperwork was filed with the Carson the same time as the SF. The Carson dropped the ball.
 
In a world without boundaries, that might be the better way to go, but...

The STATE cannot make or enforce rules on FEDERAL land that address the use of that land. All the G&F cops can do is regulate when & how someone can hunt or fish on that land. The feds could close down access to any one NF & the G&F people couldn't do a thing about it.

That said, the permit system the USFS uses is in place for a couple reasons. For one, it's meant to prevent over-crowding. Just use the Weminuche for example; if any outfitter could just go in & set up a camp, it would have a bunch of then tripping over each other. Another reason is to protect the environment from being destroyed, especially where horses are involved. That's one reason they assign a specific camp area to use every year. That way the damage is relegated to that one area.

But then you already knew all that... ;)
Not exactly true, but far enough down a tangential rabbit hole to save for another day.

What I object to is federal bureaucrats limiting access to potentially properly licensed (state) guides. Go ahead and implement a reservation system (like they do in NP’s) to limit overcrowding, but let the marketplace determine who gets the hunters, not who was in line first at the clerk.

Everyone who is licensed to guide by the state should have access to the NF, subject to compliance with the administrative stuff like insurance and a clean track record.
 
Outfitter said he received his green light permit from the SF. He was authorized to guide and outfit in the SF.

Paperwork was filed with the Carson the same time as the SF. The Carson dropped the ball.
Actually, It looks like the outfitter dropped the ball. You don’t have the permit until it is in your hand. Also, rookie move not paying the measly $500ish fine. Way to “prove” you were right and have it cost you 15x as much. Guy is proving he isn’t breaking into the double digits on the old IQ test.
 
“But Ortiz said that’s not what happened. He said that they killed the sheep in the Santa Fe National Forest and had carried it into the Carson National Forest.”

Totally believable. That’s usually what most folks do. Haul an animal over the next ridge to gut it out and quarter it up. How did he even say that with a straight face?
We've hauled elk out whole on a trailer before so it wouldn't ruin a hot wallow.
 
"When Olsson and Carrell arrived at Ortiz’s campsite, they found several unoccupied tents, according to court filings. They deduced they were standing 2 miles inside Carson National Forest."

"Olsson and Carrell continued down the trail to an overlook, where they spotted Ortiz and a group of people who appeared to be processing a dead bighorn sheep. They saw no other hunting parties in the area."

The rules are the rules I guess but it doesn't sound like the place was over crowded or the habitat was being destroyed.
 
Outfitter said he received his green light permit from the SF. He was authorized to guide and outfit in the SF.

Paperwork was filed with the Carson the same time as the SF. The Carson dropped the ball.
Did you read the article Horniac posted?
 
Actually, It looks like the outfitter dropped the ball. You don’t have the permit until it is in your hand. Also, rookie move not paying the measly $500ish fine. Way to “prove” you were right and have it cost you 15x as much. Guy is proving he isn’t breaking into the double digits on the old IQ test.

Outfitter said by paying the $500 fine he also couldn't operate for 3 years.

Wasn't an option according to him. Carson dropped the ball. Funny how one ranger district and forest had their act together and the other didn't...
 
Did you read the article Horniac posted?
Who's Horniac?

I also read info from the outfitter themselves.

The problem with the case is that it hinges on GPS coordinates on an itinerary and not the actual "kill sight".

The prosecution made the whole case on the technicality of paperwork and what was written.
 
Last edited:
Who's Horniac?

I also read info from the outfitter themselves...

Apparently the outfitter was full of it.
 
So Tell Me This?

Why Would The USFS Care In One State?

And Don't Care in This State?

The Illegal Quad Queers Have Ripped/Shredded Public Ground to Pieces & Nobody Does Anything About it Here!

In Fact!

Alot of These Illegal Trails a couple Years Later are Marked with Number Signs & Added to their Maps!

I Guess When there's Nothing Left To hunt It Won't Matter!
 
Not exactly true, but far enough down a tangential rabbit hole to save for another day.

What I object to is federal bureaucrats limiting access to potentially properly licensed (state) guides. Go ahead and implement a reservation system (like they do in NP’s) to limit overcrowding, but let the marketplace determine who gets the hunters, not who was in line first at the clerk.

Everyone who is licensed to guide by the state should have access to the NF, subject to compliance with the administrative stuff like insurance and a clean track record.
I'm not sure how the system in NM is set up, but in Colo. a guide & an outfitter are subject to different rules & have different licenses.

I had a guide's license. Only requirements were to have Class A medical training & pass a written test, which in my case was administered by the local game warden. I couldn't legally guide unless I worked for an outfitter. Unless it has changed, the state license needed for an outfitter is issued through a separate agency that is strictly involved with outfitters.
 
I’m not making my point well. I don’t think the USFS should be allowed to determine who guides on “their” land (again, subject to all the rules and regs of BOTH agencies). I believe the state wildlife agencies should do that.

What if only the worst guides and outfitters could get USFS permits?
 
Couple quotes I find interesting

“The U.S. Attorney’s Office is fully committed to enforcing our land and wildlife laws so that all Americans, including generations of Americans to come, can enjoy our Nation’s natural resources, and not those who attempt to profit by violating the law.”

“The national forests belong to every citizen"

The forest doesn't belong to the citizens it belongs to the feds.
And if you want to access it or use it you'll be granted permission for a fee otherwise you'll pay a fine.
America the land of the fee and home of the slave
Wes
 

Apparently the outfitter was full of it.

Apparently....
 
I’m not making my point well. I don’t think the USFS should be allowed to determine who guides on “their” land (again, subject to all the rules and regs of BOTH agencies). I believe the state wildlife agencies should do that.

What if only the worst guides and outfitters could get USFS permits?
The agency responsible for the OUTFITTER licenses is the one that should do the weeding of the 'worst.' That generally is the DNR/G&F or as I said above, a separate entity in Colo. That's a whole different animal than who is permitted to USE the NF for commercial gain.
 
The agency responsible for the OUTFITTER licenses is the one that should do the weeding of the 'worst.' That generally is the DNR/G&F or as I said above, a separate entity in Colo. That's a whole different animal than who is permitted to USE the NF for commercial gain.
NM G&F issues outfitter licenses, separate and different from guide licenses. A guide cannot outfit a hunt and can only guide "in consideration of" under an outfitter.

G&F had to use the USFS to press charges as they do not have jurisdiction in the matter of use permits.

The hunt itself was not illegal. Not having an active operating permit was.

The Carson still dropped the ball as they lost paperwork the SF apparently didn't.

This case is a matter of mistakes on both sides.
 
NM G&F issues outfitter licenses, separate and different from guide licenses. A guide cannot outfit a hunt and can only guide "in consideration of" under an outfitter.

G&F had to use the USFS to press charges as they do not have jurisdiction in the matter of use permits.

The hunt itself was not illegal. Not having an active operating permit was.

The Carson still dropped the ball as they lost paperwork the SF apparently didn't.

This case is a matter of mistakes on both sides.
Yup. Sounds like the set-up is pretty much like Colo. with two different licenses for guides & outfitters.

In AZ, there is no such thing as an outfitter. G&F issues guide licenses only which are good anywhere, but to guide on NF, the same permit/liability insurance mandate is in effect.

One guide here just had his license suspended by the G&F commission for 5 years for 'falsifying' his annual report. He left off several hunters he had guided in a NF where he didn't have a permit to outfit there.
 
Outfitter said he received his green light permit from the SF. He was authorized to guide and outfit in the SF.

Paperwork was filed with the Carson the same time as the SF. The Carson dropped the ball.
Doesn't the outfitter get documentation stating they have a permit, i.e permit number, etc.
I'm not saying he's lying, but getting the "green light" over the phone, seems weak at best.
I don't trust the gov't in most cases, so Carson probably did drop the ball, but this mistake cost him.
 
He's a dumbass. Any outfitter worth his salt knows he needs paperwork in his hand before he enters. It's a shitshow, the amount of paperwork required, but it's part of the game. Along with not wasting your packers time or your horse flesh. Yep Scott, I'm talkin to you.

250959175_567560077577146_4643318755171589077_n.jpg
 
Doesn't the outfitter get documentation stating they have a permit, i.e permit number, etc.
I'm not saying he's lying, but getting the "green light" over the phone, seems weak at best.
I don't trust the gov't in most cases, so Carson probably did drop the ball, but this mistake cost him.
It's not a phone call.
 
Bottom line: the guy screwed up and he made it worse for himself by fighting it. Hopefully the state will revoke his outfitting license - he’s got no business being an outfitter.
 
Finally, I had a buddy in PHX who was arrested for taking a leak in an alley behind a bar. The homeless dude next to the dumpster was an undercover cop.
________________________________________________________________________

Many years ago on patrol I was in the parking lot of a local bar noted for "local bad a$$es" drinking there. I was talking to a older couple who had stopped to ask me directions to a forest service campground to spend the night in their R.V.
While talking to them, I heard the woman suck wind and I looked in the direction she was staring. One of our local Indians was 25 feet away in front of the bar. He had whipped it out and was peeing in front of us. I knew that he saw us, and saw a cop and decided to test the cop to see what he would do. I yelled at him to zip it up and go in the bar and use the restroom.
He yelled back, fu#k you. He failed the attitude test with that. I arrested him for indecent exposure and drunk in public.
The D.A. denied the charge for indecent exposure with this statement on the denial form. "No indecent exposure, just a typical Indian taking a piss".
In CA. peeing in public is no longer a criminal violation.
RELH
Sometimes, you just got to go. :ROFLMAO:

I actually agree with the judge on that one.
 
Elk nuts the main reason he was arrested was the fact he failed the attitude test and I knew he was testing me to see if I would react or back down. I was solo, no partner, in that bar parking lot and he had a few buddies with him also waiting to see what I would do.
Needless to say, I never had any future problems with him again as he knew he could not get away with any B.S.
Some of the local Indians were good at testing a new cop to see what he was made of, and in a few incidents they were able to back the cop down if he was out numbered. Those cops did not last long working the hill beat where backup was a long time in coming.
RELH
 
Elk nuts the main reason he was arrested was the fact he failed the attitude test and I knew he was testing me to see if I would react or back down. I was solo, no partner, in that bar parking lot and he had a few buddies with him also waiting to see what I would do.
Needless to say, I never had any future problems with him again as he knew he could not get away with any B.S.
Some of the local Indians were good at testing a new cop to see what he was made of, and in a few incidents they were able to back the cop down if he was out numbered. Those cops did not last long working the hill beat where backup was a long time in coming.
RELH
A Hatfield always has a backup. A gallon can of kerosene. It's best just to say yes sir and go quietly.
 
Elk nuts the main reason he was arrested was the fact he failed the attitude test and I knew he was testing me to see if I would react or back down. I was solo, no partner, in that bar parking lot and he had a few buddies with him also waiting to see what I would do.
Needless to say, I never had any future problems with him again as he knew he could not get away with any B.S.
Some of the local Indians were good at testing a new cop to see what he was made of, and in a few incidents they were able to back the cop down if he was out numbered. Those cops did not last long working the hill beat where backup was a long time in coming.
RELH
Same thing with my buddy. Leaves the bar and tries to take a piss before he gets in his car.

Homeless dude in the alley tells him to put his brandon back in his pants, so he tells homeless dude to f#@k off. Homeless dude kicks his ass and cuffs him.

I guess the cop was pissed that he had his stakeout got ruined.
 
Bluehair, I can relate to that.
Eel, the real backup is that 45 I carried. kerosene was used to take care of the mess.
RELH
 
Couple quotes I find interesting

“The U.S. Attorney’s Office is fully committed to enforcing our land and wildlife laws so that all Americans, including generations of Americans to come, can enjoy our Nation’s natural resources, and not those who attempt to profit by violating the law.”

“The national forests belong to every citizen"

The forest doesn't belong to the citizens it belongs to the feds.
And if you want to access it or use it you'll be granted permission for a fee otherwise you'll pay a fine.
America the land of the fee and home of the slave
Wes
I think you left out, “use it commercially”. Big difference.
 
“But Ortiz said that’s not what happened. He said that they killed the sheep in the Santa Fe National Forest and had carried it into the Carson National Forest.”

Totally believable. That’s usually what most folks do. Haul an animal over the next ridge to gut it out and quarter it up. How did he even say that with a straight face?
He is trying to.cover his arse he knew, exactly what where how when &,. Why he just didnt think he was, gonna, get caught
The article clearly says, they CINFIRMED( the guides own employees told them exactly where it was killed, probably brought them to the kill sight) it was,killed in a section Of national forest he didn"t have permission or permits to hunt
I think one of his clients was an under cover usfs employee or informant eithier way glad the scum got caught
 
Department of Justice
U.S. Attorney’s Office
District of New Mexico
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Thursday, December 9, 2021

Las Vegas man found guilty of illegally guiding hunt
in Carson National Forest

ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. – A federal court on Dec. 1 found Carlos Ortiz, 28, of Las Vegas, New Mexico, guilty of illegally guiding a bighorn sheep hunt in the Carson National Forest. On December 8, the court sentenced Ortiz to a year and a half of probation and fined him $7,600.

According to court records, on Aug. 7, 2020, Ortiz, doing business as Reaper Backcountry Outfitters, was guiding a party to hunt bighorn sheep. Though the itinerary for the hunt stated that it was to take place in the Santa Fe National Forest, the GPS coordinates included in the itinerary were located in the Carson National Forest.

Officers from the U.S. Forest Service and the New Mexico Department of Game and Fish encountered the party at their campsite in the Carson National Forest. The officers also had encountered two individuals on horseback who told officers they were helping Ortiz pack out a bighorn sheep killed by Ortiz’s client. The officers confirmed that the sheep had been killed in the Carson National Forest.

At the time, Ortiz was not authorized to conduct any commercial activity in the Carson National Forest and was not authorized to guide bighorn sheep hunts in the Santa Fe National Forest. Additionally, he was not authorized to conduct guided hunts with overnight camping in either forest.

“Those at the Forest Service and the New Mexico Department of Game and Fish who enforce our laws to protect and sustain our Nation’s forests and wildlife are stewards of our country’s rich and diverse natural heritage, which includes majestic animals like North America’s bighorn sheep,” said U.S. Attorney Fred Federici. “The U.S. Attorney’s Office is fully committed to enforcing our land and wildlife laws so that all Americans, including generations of Americans to come, can enjoy our Nation’s natural resources, and not those who attempt to profit by violating the law.”

“I am very pleased to see this conviction and sentence,” said Special Agent in Charge James Alford from the U.S. Forest Service Southwestern Region. “The national forests belong to every citizen and when someone is willfully violating the law it steals opportunities for others to enjoy our public lands. This is especially true in this case since an outfitter guide was breaking the law for commercial gain. I want to thank our U.S. Forest Service law enforcement officers, New Mexico Department of Game and Fish conservations officers, and Assistant U.S. Attorneys for their outstanding work of protecting America’s national forests and natural resources.”

“I want to thank the U.S. Forest Service law enforcement officers and Conservation Officers for their hard work on this case in New Mexico’s backcountry,” said Game and Fish Colonel Bobby Griego. “It is important for all New Mexico Outfitters to ensure they not only have completed requirements from the Game and Fish Department, but also our federal and state land management partners.”

The U.S. Forest Service and the New Mexico Department of Game and Fish investigated this case. Assistant U.S. Attorneys Louis Mattei and Rumaldo Armijo prosecuted the case.
Ok I’m confused as well did he just not have a guide license?
Or do the guides have to pay fees to hunt, camp, poop and pee anywhere there hunt?
 

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos
Back
Top Bottom