The defense argued the regulations concerning vehicles, by their literal terms, make any use of motor vehicle by a hunter during deer season unlawful, whether the vehicle was simply transporting the hunter from his home or if it was being used to actively pursue deer.If the Department of Conservation appeals the ruling, the case will be decided by the Missouri Supreme Court. If not, Jones and Turner get off scot-free. Which begs the question: are dogs or lawyers man's best friend in this case?
The regulation about dogs, by its literal term, makes the presence of a hunter who is "'pursuing" a deer in an undefined geographic area unlawful if dogs (also in an undefined general geographical location) may be "in use" or have been "in use".
The regulation also uses "dogs" in a plural sense, thus there is question as to whether a hunter can use one dog or if a hunting group could use one dog.
Support Local Journalism.
Join the Riverfront Times Press Club
Local journalism is information. Information is power. And we believe everyone deserves access to accurate independent coverage of their community and state. Our readers helped us continue this coverage in 2020, and we are so grateful for the support.
Help us keep this coverage going in 2021. Whether it's a one-time acknowledgement of this article or an ongoing membership pledge, your support goes to local-based reporting from our small but mighty team.
Join the Riverfront Times Club for as little as $5 a month.