Pennsylvania Game News - December 2011 - 30

even remarked that the photo looked like the area where we had found him that morning. After searching the house and finding nothing, we asked Dumco how he viewed his trail camera photos. He showed us a small viewing screen that he inserted his camera SD card into. We then asked how he printed the photos. He said he guessed the card would have to be taken to WalMart. He gave us permission to view the SD cards, and we found photos of deer and turkeys from the trail camera, along with what looked like corn used for bait to get the game in front of the camera. Nothing was real solid as far as helping our case, though. Anderson then looked in a drawer of Dumco’s desk and called me into the room. “Look at what I just found,” he said with a grin. Exactly what we were looking for—lots of photos of Dumco with the 6-point, and photos of the same deer feeding on corn in what looked like the area where we had found him hunting that morning. We looked through many photos and seized several that could be used in court, along with the skull/antlers of the 6-point and the photo with it. Driving home that night we were trying to figure out how to prove that the 6-point had been killed at Ricketts Glen, and over bait. The dates/times on the camera photos did not match. Anderson said that we’d just have to go back to where we found Dumco, take the photos with us and try to match up the background. I agreed, but pointed out that even if we did find similar backgrounds of the baited area and in the photos, tying the dead deer to the area would be hard to prove unless it
30

dropped dead near the bait. If the deer ran very far at all, we’d have a hard time finding where the deer photos were taken. The next day we were back to the site. First using the photos of the 6-point feeding on corn we matched the background of the woods with the background in the photos. That proved the buck had been alive in this area, feeding on corn that had been placed there, right where Dumco was hunting when we found him a year later. Now we had to match this area with the photo of the deer after it had been killed. Trying from different angles we realized that in the photo of Dumco and his daughter posing with the dead buck, there were two trees that had branches zigzagging in a distinct way. “I got it!” Anderson yelled, as he told me to look up at the trees behind where the trail camera was bolted to the beech tree. “There are those trees,” he said, as he held up the photo. He was right. Unbelievably, the buck must have dropped right in its tracks when Dumco shot it. Now we had everything we needed to prove that the buck was there alive and was also killed there—but what about the bait? We needed to talk to Vinny Samaritan. We found him that afternoon, and he couldn’t have been more helpful. He was more than glad to give us a statement and testify in court, if necessary. When we returned Dumco’s trail camera — we had no use for it — we decided to give him one last chance to come clean with us, but he continued to stick to the same story. After sorting through all the applicable charges, I filed on Dumco the following: Not wearing fluorescent orange, $100; unlawful devices and methods (hunting in a baited area), $150; unlawful taking of game for being in possession of an unGAME NEWS

Pennsylvania Game News - December 2011

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Pennsylvania Game News - December 2011