Washington Township man faces felony poaching charges |

Washington Township man faces felony poaching charges

Doug Oster | Tribune-Review
Bob Frye | Everybody Adventures

A state game warden says in court documents that a Washington Township man had more than a dozen unlawfully taken whitetail deer carcasses in his home.

Corey Scott Wolford, 47, faces 12 felony counts of unlawful killing of big game and 28 related misdemeanor and summary charges.

Wolford waived his right to a preliminary hearing Monday before District Judge Jason Buczak in Washington Township.

State Game Warden Michael Papinchak wrote in court documents that a warrant served at Wolford’s Goldfinch Drive home May 3 found the parts of “16 individual and distinct whitetail deer.”

He also possessed the pelts of three illegally taken raccoons, the shell of a protected turtle and parts of three protected bird species, according to the court documents.

Papinchak wrote that Wolford “made statements that he had never tagged a deer he had killed, a statement supported by the finding of multiple licenses from various years all having unused tags still attached.”

Pennsylvania law requires a deer to be tagged immediately after killing and before the carcass is moved, according to Papinchak.

Wolford is free on bond. A formal arraignment is scheduled for Aug. 29 before Judge Rita Hathaway in Greensburg.

Matthew Medsger is a Tribune-Review staff writer. Reach him at 724-226-4675, [email protected] or via Twitter @matthew_medsger.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.