I would think that would depend on circumstance.

IF the Land Owner leases the property or otherwise normally receives 'consideration' in the form of monies, trades or interests of value, then yes, he might well make a case for 'loss' or 'damage'.

Conversely, IF this were just a Land Owner/Buddy thing....allowing you to hunt on their land then I think it would be a pretty weak suit. If there was never an agreement for consideration....then by default no verbal contract or breach thereof (legally speaking).

Offender just really, really took advantage of the land owner.

Then also you'd need to think about, is it worth your money to go down that road for illegally taking more deer outside of your verbal contract you had with that person?

If the lessee signed a lease agreement that stated the harvest criteria ( which is customary) or the lease had written rules that specified harvest criteria (which is also customary) it is legally binding and will hold up in a court of law. Deer hunting brings out the worst in some folks.

Your example has water in it. Are not exotics owned by the land owner? Texas deer are not. I agree on the civil side, but still not convinced criminally, yet.

Rule breaker not a law breaker.

I didn’t know you could sell deer. I thought we all owned the deer. I think all you can sell is access. That’s how it should be.

It's about consent, not who owns the deer. It only gets into that when they add the restitution.

From TPWD FAQ

Hunting
I lease my property to a group of individuals for hunting. Am I required to let them hunt all species within the bag limits for my county as listed in the Outdoor Annual?

No. A landowner may restrict hunters to bag limits or species more conservative than those found in the Outdoor Annual. Individuals who are not abiding by the terms of a landowner/hunter agreement may be charged with "taking a wildlife resource without the consent of the landowner."

It's really pretty easy to understand. Taking game animals without the landowner's consent is poaching. If the landowner says you can shoot one whitetail buck on his land and you shoot two; you are poaching.

If caught, charged, and convicted the extra deer taken without consent would be a State jail felony, a loss of hunting license, restitution to the state, and confiscation of gear used to take the deer if they throw the entire section of that Parks and Wildlife code at them.

The law is quite clear. The "hunter" did not have permission to take any deer over the limit authorized by the land owner. As soon as he did, he no longer had the permission of the land owner. Since these were white tail, state law clearly says that's a state felony. I'd call the game warden on him and let him/her handle it. Maybe he would learn his lesson a bit better this way because he obviously has zero concern for rules and authority.

If the agreement to take one animal is in writing.

Where is that in the statute?

The Texas Parks and Wildlife Code section 61.

I know the section of the TPW Code; I was the first one in this thread to reference it. Can you show me where it says "written consent"?

I misunderstood the totally of your question. It doesn’t say written and I have no idea where that came from. I assume out of a butt.

I concur.

This happened years ago on a paid guided hunt near Childress. Guy shot two bucks. Landowner had the hunter charged with taking game without landowners permission since only one buck was authorized and had to pay for the 2nd buck/hunt.

Now if a lease, better be in writing.

Land owner consent ended when the hunter took the predetermined amount of game. Anything beyond that is liable to criminal charges by the way tpwd writes it. Now getting a warden to charge it and/or proving in court what was agreed upon would require some documentation, I'd think, otherwise it's hunter's word against land owner's....

If the in writing thing held water, every trespassing poacher could say they had permission and get away with it because its their word againt the landowner. When you start using what ifs to justify doing something illegal without being caught there are an infinite possible what if scenarios. Like what if the landowner just counters and says they never gave the hunter consent to kill anything and is trespassing. In today's world there is likely going to be evidence to the agreement beyond witnesses, lease agreements, liability waivers, payment records, license tag and logs, etc. be it email, text, social media, front porch cameras, etc. Otherwise, it's probably someone known to the landowner and handled privately anyway. Yet another what if scenario.

I think this would be a good question for a game warden. Generally speaking, agents of the government (game warden in this case) don't enforce civil agreements. Something like hunting without a license, taking game out of season, exceeding the county limit, etc, is clear. Any agreement between the landowner (or agent) and anyone else is civil, and if it is violated, there is the opportunity for a civil recourse. I have been involved is some civil litigation cases, and it is not like what you see on tv. It is very expensive, time consuming, and emotionally draining. If a criminal case was filed, and made it to court, the landowner would have to show up, EACH TIME. Cases rarely are tried on the first setting, and it is common to go to court numerous times, on the same case. This often takes over a year. Do you think this is a cost worth paying for the average land owner?

But every case of poaching is without land owners consent, by the very wording of the regulation it references the lack of land owner agreement, no matter if they are on the property or shoot across a fence from the road. Every poached deer conviction includes a civil restitution to the state. Too much trouble for the gw to charge, or landowner to show up, landowner or call the game warden is just another one of those what ifs. It does not change the law or justify taking a chance on breaking it. This was from the horses mouth. This is the answer you will get if you email tpwd law enforcement with the question.

No. A landowner may restrict hunters to bag limits or species more conservative than those found in the Outdoor Annual. Individuals who are not abiding by the terms of a landowner/hunter agreement may be charged with "taking a wildlife resource without the consent of the landowner."

Victims aren’t required to give testimonial evidence at criminal pre-trial hearings. That’s what a statement is for. Been through this thousands of times.

I still think the liability here is more civil than criminal and quite good civilly.

Assuming so....what would the complainant (land owner) claim?

Damages?

If the L/O doesn't regularly receive income/consideration for the use of the land, hunting or tresspass fees, then I don't see how he could make a claim that the deer killed caused him damage. The STATE in a criminal case could.

Every convicted case of any game animal taken without landowner consent already includes civil restitution to the state for the animal. The landowner does not own it.

Civil Restitution
In addition to the criminal penalty for hunting and fishing violations, the department will seek the civil recovery value for the loss or damage to wildlife resources. The civil restitution cost is payable to Texas Parks and Wildlife Department. Failure to pay the civil recovery value will result in the department's refusal to issue a license, tag or permit. Hunting or fishing after failing or refusing to pay civil restitution is a Class A misdemeanor punishable by a $500 - $4,000 fine; punishment in jail (not to exceed one year); or both. For questions call (512) 389-4630.