Hunting Washington Forum

Big Game Hunting => Elk Hunting => Topic started by: JDHasty on May 15, 2016, 01:15:34 AM


Advertise Here
Title: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 15, 2016, 01:15:34 AM
http://www.yakimaherald.com/news/local/hunter-facing-charges-after-death-of-beloved-elk-named-bullwinkle/article_844ec8ac-1a65-11e6-8639-53981ae0fc80.html
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: BULLBLASTER on May 15, 2016, 01:32:50 AM
That article doesn't paint a great picture for hunting in general...
Not a good deal any way you look at it.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 15, 2016, 01:52:23 AM
I have no problem except the hunt was not legal. 

What earthly value the "trophy" has as a hunting trophy escapes me.  But that is not any of my concern.   What a man hangs in his trophy room is his business, but this was a clear cut case of Unlawful Hunting of Big Game. 

It is the violation of our game laws and the audacity of the act that disturbs me more than the taking of an elk that has a name attached to it. 

I liked the fact that I could find this elk for my kids to look at, but hey, my kids understand that "while Canada geese are beautiful, when you pull their feathers out they have meat inside."

I did make the Bullwinkle analogy knowing full well....  but hey, a legal elk is a legal elk and an "elk" that has palmated antlers, is almost black and has a little friend that answers to the name of Rocket J is not a legal elk.  No one gets to hunt him irrespective of what elk tag you have. 

Well, this blond poster child of a bull elk might just as well have been all of the above for purpose  of his being a legal elk.  Just by virtue that he was munching alfalfa in GMU 334 in GMU 334 when shot he might as well have had palmated antlers, been almost black and had a little friend named Rocket J.

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bean Counter on May 15, 2016, 04:38:20 AM
Is this the same story which drew a multipage discussion earlier this year and there was someone getting hot and bothered about a legal issue?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: TVHunts on May 15, 2016, 05:56:38 AM
I guess no more speculation on this one.  I can't grasp it being called a trophy due to the way it was harvested, to each his own I suppose.  That fact that it was likely illegal compounds my view even further. 

I think he should have his hunting rights revoked for life myself.  I also think the people that helped him should be charged and prosecuted as well.  They assisted him for some cash which is pretty disgusting. There is not even a small chance that the locals didn't know this was out of the legal hunting unit.

Clowns like this make us all look bad...
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Magnum_Willys on May 15, 2016, 06:25:51 AM
He paid big bucks for the "Any Bull" tag.  I would assume that means ANY bull as long as you are following the hunting times and other regulations for that area. If its open for Elk you can shoot Any Bull.  ???  Not defending the guy just wondering did the tag say only good in branch antlered units?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: MADMAX on May 15, 2016, 06:30:19 AM
Definitely something for him to be proud of
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on May 15, 2016, 06:34:32 AM
I guess no more speculation on this one.  I can't grasp it being called a trophy due to the way it was harvested, to each his own I suppose.  That fact that it was likely illegal compounds my view even further. 

I think he should have his hunting rights revoked for life myself.  I also think the people that helped him should be charged and prosecuted as well.  They assisted him for some cash which is pretty disgusting. There is not even a small chance that the locals didn't know this was out of the legal hunting unit.

Clowns like this make us all look bad...

Let the court system do its job before you make judgements like that. That article had very little research put into it. Looks like the guy just read the thread that was put on here. No wonder at all legal action is going to be used. A few guys on here, and one in particular have spread information that is not accurate.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: BUTTER on May 15, 2016, 07:08:21 AM
Seems unlikely someone with a tag like that would risk a chance of getting in trouble at least you'd hope not
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: andrew_in_idaho on May 15, 2016, 07:11:55 AM
He paid big bucks for the "Any Bull" tag.  I would assume that means ANY bull as long as you are following the hunting times and other regulations for that area. If its open for Elk you can shoot Any Bull.  ???  Not defending the guy just wondering did the tag say only good in branch antlered units?
The tag specified any bull elk in east side GMUs open to branch antlered bull hunting. The ellensburg GMU doesn't have any branch antlered bull opportunities
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 15, 2016, 07:25:18 AM
He paid big bucks for the "Any Bull" tag.  I would assume that means ANY bull as long as you are following the hunting times and other regulations for that area. If its open for Elk you can shoot Any Bull.  ???  Not defending the guy just wondering did the tag say only good in branch antlered units?

Absolutely 100%, unequivocally, the tag is not valid in GMU's closed to branched antler elk hunting. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on May 15, 2016, 07:39:43 AM
Interesting side note here....

"Bullwinkle often fed at the home of Mark and Frances Chmelewski, the couple who gave him that name.

“He would come into our yard and eat apples off our tree, and we’d sit and watch, just meters from him,” Mark Chmelewski said.

“Every year we’d say a little prayer that Bullwinkle would survive the hunting season because he was just such a beautiful, majestic animal.”"

 and then after google

http://www.dailyrecordnews.com/news/frances-chmelewski-is-new-kittitas-county-superior-court-judge/article_61b61d0a-162c-11e1-8f9d-001cc4c03286.html


Karma??
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 15, 2016, 07:50:29 AM
I guess no more speculation on this one.  I can't grasp it being called a trophy due to the way it was harvested, to each his own I suppose.  That fact that it was likely illegal compounds my view even further. 

I think he should have his hunting rights revoked for life myself.  I also think the people that helped him should be charged and prosecuted as well.  They assisted him for some cash which is pretty disgusting. There is not even a small chance that the locals didn't know this was out of the legal hunting unit.

Clowns like this make us all look bad...

Let the court system do its job before you make judgements like that. That article had very little research put into it. Looks like the guy just read the thread that was put on here. No wonder at all legal action is going to be used. A few guys on here, and one in particular have spread information that is not accurate.

There is nothing in the article that supports your claims.  In fact it looks like the author did his own research.   
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Magnum_Willys on May 15, 2016, 07:53:11 AM
Uh yea not much wiggle room here....
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on May 15, 2016, 08:30:21 AM
Seems unlikely someone with a tag link that would risk a chance of getting in trouble at least you'd hope not

I'm not going to comment on any details while this case is open  or before the person on this forum gets served. I will tell you great steps were taken to do the right thing.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: TVHunts on May 15, 2016, 08:35:40 AM
I guess no more speculation on this one.  I can't grasp it being called a trophy due to the way it was harvested, to each his own I suppose.  That fact that it was likely illegal compounds my view even further. 

I think he should have his hunting rights revoked for life myself.  I also think the people that helped him should be charged and prosecuted as well.  They assisted him for some cash which is pretty disgusting. There is not even a small chance that the locals didn't know this was out of the legal hunting unit.

Clowns like this make us all look bad...

Let the court system do its job before you make judgements like that. That article had very little research put into it. Looks like the guy just read the thread that was put on here. No wonder at all legal action is going to be used. A few guys on here, and one in particular have spread information that is not accurate.

Paragraph 1, sentence 3, I state "likely illegal".  The rest of my post then becomes qualified by those words I believe. I Guess I could have been more careful and clear with my opinion as to not offend anyone.

I'm looking forward to following the legal proceedings. 

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bobcat on May 15, 2016, 08:48:34 AM
Great article. Lots of facts, even some things I didn't already know. I'm not sure if it makes hunting in general look bad, but it certainly looks bad for the auction and raffle tags.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on May 15, 2016, 08:54:34 AM
Seems unlikely someone with a tag link that would risk a chance of getting in trouble at least you'd hope not

I'm not going to comment on any details while this case is open  or before the person on this forum gets served. I will tell you great steps were taken to do the right thing.

And the right thing was?  :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on May 15, 2016, 08:58:09 AM
Seems unlikely someone with a tag link that would risk a chance of getting in trouble at least you'd hope not

I'm not going to comment on any details while this case is open  or before the person on this forum gets served. I will tell you great steps were taken to do the right thing.

And the right thing was?  :chuckle:

Welcome to the site. Pretty big first couple of posts.

And who is getting served if you don't mind me asking.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on May 15, 2016, 09:23:04 AM
Seems unlikely someone with a tag link that would risk a chance of getting in trouble at least you'd hope not

I'm not going to comment on any details while this case is open  or before the person on this forum gets served. I will tell you great steps were taken to do the right thing.

And the right thing was?  :chuckle:

Welcome to the site. Pretty big first couple of posts.

And who is getting served if you don't mind me asking.

Thank you for the welcome.  I signed up to this forum to hopefully clear things up some. There has been a lot of false information posted on this site. A call was made to the game department asking if it was ok to shoot the bull where it located. After Morgan Grant from the game department checked into it another phone conversation took place and the hunters were told they absolutely could harvest that bull with that tag at that location. If in fact the info given was wrong the game department is the one to be blamed.

As for the person on here that will be dealing with legal issues, I can't tell you who that is at this point. But if you read the thread on this topic that was removed it would be really easy for you to guess who.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: BUTTER on May 15, 2016, 09:54:06 AM
I believe a phone conversation if in fact went down is no excuse on where you killed the animal. Come on we all know where and when we can hunt and ifnwe don't we shouldn't be hunting. Like I said though who really knows all the facts this is between the hunter and the state officials now hownit stands. I hope though for the hunter he was in fact doing the right thing
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on May 15, 2016, 10:04:58 AM
I believe a phone conversation if in fact went down is no excuse on where you killed the animal. Come on we all know where and when we can hunt and ifnwe don't we shouldn't be hunting. Like I said though who really knows all the facts this is between the hunter and the state officials now hownit stands. I hope though for the hunter he was in fact doing the right thing

You have every right to that opinion. My opinion is that if you are unsure of something you should be able to call your well paid public servant that is supposed to be the professional on the subject and get clarification.

I will say I would rather be in the hunters shoes facing that legal issue, than facing the civil issue the guy will be dealing with for publicly dragging the hunter through the mud. Win lose or draw it's going to be a really long drawn out EXPENSIVE situation.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Branden on May 15, 2016, 10:07:07 AM
I'm not going to comment on the legalities of it because I was not there nor the one that got supposed permission to hunt that area.

I do have a problem though with the part about how it's bad to shoot an animal in a field. Zero difference then shooting a cat out of a tree. Neither one takes any skill yet 99% of the people on this site would jump at the chance to shoot a lion in a tree. The first thread on this issue was started because guys were saying it wasn't much of a hunt. Not that it was illegal. Then that started after a page or two.

So for the guys that are saying it's not hunting get off your high horse.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: DaveMonti on May 15, 2016, 10:10:02 AM
Really, we're doing this again, a day after the previous lengthy topic was locked?  Can't people just be happy for now that the State has filed charges and now let the process work instead of all this needless discussion over a well beaten topic? 

I hope this thread is locked quickly so it doesn't keep popping up in my "show new replies to your post" page. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JLS on May 15, 2016, 10:11:22 AM
I believe a phone conversation if in fact went down is no excuse on where you killed the animal. Come on we all know where and when we can hunt and ifnwe don't we shouldn't be hunting. Like I said though who really knows all the facts this is between the hunter and the state officials now hownit stands. I hope though for the hunter he was in fact doing the right thing

You have every right to that opinion. My opinion is that if you are unsure of something you should be able to call your well paid public servant that is supposed to be the professional on the subject and get clarification.

I will say I would rather be in the hunters shoes facing that legal issue, than facing the civil issue the guy will be dealing with for publicly dragging the hunter through the mud. Win lose or draw it's going to be a really long drawn out EXPENSIVE situation.

Common sense would seem to dictate that it's foolish to talk about an issue on a public forum with legal action pending, regardless of whether you side with the plaintiff or the defendant.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: h20hunter on May 15, 2016, 10:12:47 AM
There is an ignore feature you may choose to use.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on May 15, 2016, 10:17:45 AM
I believe a phone conversation if in fact went down is no excuse on where you killed the animal. Come on we all know where and when we can hunt and ifnwe don't we shouldn't be hunting. Like I said though who really knows all the facts this is between the hunter and the state officials now hownit stands. I hope though for the hunter he was in fact doing the right thing

You have every right to that opinion. My opinion is that if you are unsure of something you should be able to call your well paid public servant that is supposed to be the professional on the subject and get clarification.

I will say I would rather be in the hunters shoes facing that legal issue, than facing the civil issue the guy will be dealing with for publicly dragging the hunter through the mud. Win lose or draw it's going to be a really long drawn out EXPENSIVE situation.

Common sense would seem to dictate that it's foolish to talk about an issue on a public forum with legal action pending, regardless of whether you side with the plaintiff or the defendant.

I haven't and won't say anything that will have any effect on either issue. I could say a lot more on the issue, but will not for the exact reason you mentioned.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: h20hunter on May 15, 2016, 10:25:15 AM
You state you signed up to this forum to hopefully clear some things up.

Please, by all means, clear things up.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: HntnFsh on May 15, 2016, 10:26:36 AM
You state you signed up to this forum to hopefully clear some things up.

Please, by all means, clear things up.

I was also wondering when that was going to happen!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Mr Mykiss on May 15, 2016, 10:36:16 AM
I love this "I know but I'm not gonna tell you" stuff...
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: mfswallace on May 15, 2016, 10:41:40 AM
Seems unlikely someone with a tag link that would risk a chance of getting in trouble at least you'd hope not

I'm not going to comment on any details while this case is open  or before the person on this forum gets served. I will tell you great steps were taken to do the right thing.

And the right thing was?  :chuckle:

Welcome to the site. Pretty big first couple of posts.

And who is getting served if you don't mind me asking.

Thank you for the welcome.  I signed up to this forum to hopefully clear things up some. There has been a lot of false information posted on this site. A call was made to the game department asking if it was ok to shoot the bull where it located. After Morgan Grant from the game department checked into it another phone conversation took place and the hunters were told they absolutely could harvest that bull with that tag at that location. If in fact the info given was wrong the game department is the one to be blamed.

As for the person on here that will be dealing with legal issues, I can't tell you who that is at this point. But if you read the thread on this topic that was removed it would be really easy for you to guess who.

Legal precedence was set in this situation when good old uncle Joe told every one to I said, ‘Jill, if there’s ever a problem, just walk out on the balcony here, put that double-barrel shotgun and fire two blasts outside the house"

Didn't work for anyone who did that and used it as a defense...
http://therighttobear.com/why-a-man-ended-up-in-jail-after-listening-to-joe-bidens-advice-on-guns/
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/03/joe-biden-defense-gun-case-jeffrey-barton-116178

so if the vice president tells you it's ok to break the law and it doesn't work as a legal defense the word of a sergeant or anyone for that matter at wdfw ain't gonna work :twocents:

POACHING and those who condoned this however high up in wdfw should be terminated ! Money shouldn't allow you to break the law :bash:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntingfool7 on May 15, 2016, 10:44:08 AM
A repeat offender with deep pockets with a defense of an alleged phone call. 

Fines and reparations won't mean anything.  IF WDFW isn't too addicted to his money, his hunting privileges should be revoked.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 15, 2016, 10:58:27 AM
My recollection of what I had read a few years ago re: the earlier incident was that those who had been involved in the investigation were convinced they had solid evidence of a game law violation and involving the aerial spotting and felt betrayed that that charge had not been pursued.   But that charge was never pursued so I don't think the case could be made that he is a repeat game law violator.  The fact is though he did admit to breaking other laws while hunting in that case.   
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: coachcw on May 15, 2016, 11:00:23 AM
My guess is people have joined the forum to distract or draw attention away from there involvement in a messy situation . The fact that people have posted the bull was shot in 334 is true ,the involved parties aren't denying that . Whether or not they knew it was illegal or if they had permission is what the courts will decide . My guess is a few new members are also old members . I know that  there was plenty of peacocking and discriminating evidence flying around in pm's . The bottom line is this whole thing is a mess and the defendant has deep enough pockets that the whole thing wont matter much to him . My hopes are the whole thing is resolved before Sept 1st in regards to the 2016 auction tag . I imagine if found guilty he could just gift it to a friend all though I'm not sure if that's legal .
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: coachcw on May 15, 2016, 11:02:04 AM
Crazy how politicians can slander and lie about each other and nothing happens is nuts in comparison to what has been said about the defendant . 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: full choke on May 15, 2016, 11:16:33 AM
End result of this whole debacle?- You or I will not have to obey GMU boundaries, because apparently they mean nothing.

I sincerely hope this mount on the wall justifies the means...
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: grundy53 on May 15, 2016, 11:24:51 AM
End result of this whole debacle?- You or I will not have to obey GMU boundaries, because apparently they mean nothing.

I sincerely hope this mount on the wall justifies the means...
Only if you have enough money...

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Ghost Hunter on May 15, 2016, 11:56:38 AM
My guess is people have joined the forum to distract or draw attention away from there involvement in a messy situation . The fact that people have posted the bull was shot in 334 is true ,the involved parties aren't denying that . Whether or not they knew it was illegal or if they had permission is what the courts will decide . My guess is a few new members are also old members . I know that  there was plenty of peacocking and discriminating evidence flying around in pm's . The bottom line is this whole thing is a mess and the defendant has deep enough pockets that the whole thing wont matter much to him . My hopes are the whole thing is resolved before Sept 1st in regards to the 2016 auction tag . I imagine if found guilty he could just gift it to a friend all though I'm not sure if that's legal .
:yeah:  Exactly!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bulldogs40 on May 15, 2016, 11:59:31 AM
oh good, another animal with a name was killed by a person with too much money that calls himself a hunter and has the money to hire people to do the hard work for him. I think the term harvester would be more appropriate... or poacher.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bullkllr on May 15, 2016, 12:00:12 PM
I read some of the posts in the other thread with mild interest.

Seeing the story laid out in that article, and if the facts are as they appear, all I have to say is WOW  :yike:
So much wrong about the whole scenario.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: trophyhunt on May 15, 2016, 12:02:06 PM
I read some of the posts in the other thread with mild interest.

Seeing the story laid out in that article, and if the facts are as they appear, all I have to say is WOW  :yike:
So much wrong about the whole scenario.
:yeah:  I didn't bother reading the last thread for the most part, what a mess!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on May 15, 2016, 12:22:37 PM
 How does an anonymous screen name get sued?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: coachcw on May 15, 2016, 12:34:36 PM
remember there no freedom of speech  in merica !
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Miles on May 15, 2016, 12:35:21 PM
How does an anonymous screen name get sued?

Not sure if you're joking or not, but this is straight out of the forum rules:

Quote
These rules are subject to change at any time for any reason, I will update this topic when there is a change.

 The owners of this forum reserve the right to reveal your identity (or any other related information collected on this service) in the event of a formal complaint, legal, or lawful action arising from your use of this forum.

Thank You,
Forum Management Team
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on May 15, 2016, 12:37:23 PM
How does an anonymous screen name get sued?

Not sure if you're joking or not, but this is straight out of the forum rules:

Quote
These rules are subject to change at any time for any reason, I will update this topic when there is a change.

 The owners of this forum reserve the right to reveal your identity (or any other related information collected on this service) in the event of a formal complaint, legal, or lawful action arising from your use of this forum.

Thank You,
Forum Management Team

I don't know the guy's name. Do you have to provide your full legal name when you register here? I honestly have no clue as I signed up a really long time ago and don't remember.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on May 15, 2016, 12:40:35 PM
 Ironic that the day after Dale closes down the thread, this article comes out and starts a whole new one.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: cbond3318 on May 15, 2016, 12:45:50 PM
Ironic that the day after Dale closes down the thread, this article comes out and starts a whole new one.

Not ironic, disrespectful.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on May 15, 2016, 12:48:04 PM
Ironic that the day after Dale closes down the thread, this article comes out and starts a whole new one.

Not ironic, disrespectful.

 The Yakima Herald disrespected Dale? Really?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bowhunterwa87 on May 15, 2016, 12:50:11 PM
So ppl are being threatened with lawsuites..topics being closed..women have their own special board... Wow this forum isnt what it was when i signed on
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: cbond3318 on May 15, 2016, 12:52:32 PM
Ironic that the day after Dale closes down the thread, this article comes out and starts a whole new one.

Not ironic, disrespectful.


 The Yakima Herald disrespected Dale? Really?

I guess you did say article, I mis read that. I meant , the need to post this article knowing damn well it would be a continuation of the recently locked thread is disrespectful to this forum and Bearpaw.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on May 15, 2016, 12:52:44 PM
So ppl are being threatened with lawsuites..topics being closed..women have their own special board... Wow this forum isnt what it was when i signed on

Wow. Sorry to hear that.
Title: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on May 15, 2016, 12:53:45 PM
Ironic that the day after Dale closes down the thread, this article comes out and starts a whole new one.

Not ironic, disrespectful.


 The Yakima Herald disrespected Dale? Really?

I guess you did say article, I mis read that. I meant , the need to post this article knowing damn well it would be a continuation of the recently locked thread is disrespectful to this forum and Bearpaw.

I agree. There's a reason the other one was shut down. Special thanks to JDHasty for reviving this hot mess.
:bash:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on May 15, 2016, 12:54:37 PM
Ironic that the day after Dale closes down the thread, this article comes out and starts a whole new one.

Not ironic, disrespectful.


 The Yakima Herald disrespected Dale? Really?

I guess you did say article, I mis read that.

 Do you now see the irony? ;)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: coachcw on May 15, 2016, 01:47:34 PM
Maybe  it's just the common folk feeling pushed around .  I HOPE ANOTHER MEMBER POSTS HIS VIDEO LINK  .Just for clarification  :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 15, 2016, 02:02:06 PM
I was totally unaware that the other thread had been locked when I posted this.  I was in central WA until almost 10 pm. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Becky on May 15, 2016, 02:22:51 PM
So ppl are being threatened with lawsuites..topics being closed..women have their own special board... Wow this forum isnt what it was when i signed on

When did you sign on? because none of that is new.. there's been lawsuit threats, our own special women's board, and topics being closed down since prior to 2013 when you signed up ;)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on May 15, 2016, 02:51:57 PM
Ironic that the day after Dale closes down the thread, this article comes out and starts a whole new one.

Not ironic, disrespectful.


 The Yakima Herald disrespected Dale? Really?

I guess you did say article, I mis read that. I meant , the need to post this article knowing damn well it would be a continuation of the recently locked thread is disrespectful to this forum and Bearpaw.

I agree. There's a reason the other one was shut down. Special thanks to JDHasty for reviving this hot mess.
:bash:

Due to the reason given of legal threats for removing the other thread I think this goes way past disrespectful.  I am very suprised this forum continues to let this individual have access knowing his actions may lead to legal headaches for them.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bobcat on May 15, 2016, 03:07:21 PM
Well actually, I have to say, I was glad that someone posted a link to the Yakima Herald article. I may not have seen it otherwise. I probably would have posted it myself if I had come across it first. This is also being discussed on Facebook and I'm sure there are comments being posted in the Yakima Herald as well.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Miles on May 15, 2016, 03:14:11 PM
I didn't realize Tod was so old. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on May 15, 2016, 03:14:58 PM
Curious to know if all the people posting on Facebook regarding this case will be sued too?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on May 15, 2016, 03:15:31 PM
Will Zuckerberg be sued also?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: rosscrazyelk on May 15, 2016, 03:15:52 PM
The only argument  i would have in response to the guy who says he knows permission from the warden..
If it was legal to shoot why haul it and gut it in another unit?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: grundy53 on May 15, 2016, 03:18:45 PM
Curious to know if all the people posting on Facebook regarding this case will be sued too?
How about the Yakima Herald? Or the people on 24hourcampfire?

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kentrek on May 15, 2016, 03:19:29 PM
The only argument  i would have in response to the guy who says he knows permission from the warden..
If it was legal to shoot why haul it and gut it in another unit?

Some farmers don't want a gut pile in there field, I've done the exact same a couple times
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bob33 on May 15, 2016, 03:34:57 PM
Anyone can sue anyone else, at any time, for any reason,  or for no reason. Whether or not it is successful is another issue, but at a minimum the party being sued will likely have some financial consequences. To an extent our legal system is a matter of "how much justice can you afford? " If someone with deep pockets wants to make someone else miserable, it's quite doable.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on May 17, 2016, 02:52:20 PM
Anyone can sue anyone else, at any time, for any reason,  or for no reason. Whether or not it is successful is another issue, but at a minimum the party being sued will likely have some financial consequences. To an extent our legal system is a matter of "how much justice can you afford? " If someone with deep pockets wants to make someone else miserable, it's quite doable.

 Which is why the indivual pursuing the suit should have to front the estimated costs and have the balance paid in full before leaving the courthouse if they lose, or sit in jail until it's paid.

 My guess is that would reduce the backlog of cases and make people think twice before pursuing some of these BS suits. :twocents:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: birddogdad on May 17, 2016, 03:30:45 PM
Well actually, I have to say, I was glad that someone posted a link to the Yakima Herald article. I may not have seen it otherwise. I probably would have posted it myself if I had come across it first. This is also being discussed on Facebook and I'm sure there are comments being posted in the Yakima Herald as well.

thanks for the link to the article. I find it interesting how this one animal and hunter has created such a stir... from a different perspective, this person has probably put into WA state conservation (financially) MORE than this entire site full of hunters combine since just 2007. I don't know him, his ethics, or how rich he is either.. This animal was a conservation tool, used to draw money from us all for a chance of a lifetime, one ticket ever year for me too! Ethics and location maybe not so much. In the end, the money this one hunter has given has most likely made a direct impact in WA and now, the state will waste most of it (i bet) toward litigation and investigation fees. Why not just fix the book to allow this to occur, after all, these raffles and auction tags are just designed to make conservation dollars as I am led to understand in all the writings right? One draw, one animal, one hunter? Is it really that bad that this old rich dude paid to play or are we just jealous and casting stones?
Again, just considering the gain from all the moneys invested, not the ethical hunting of one man position. I find it more appalling when a person of this financial affluence takes the route of posting up a 100K piece of property his millionaire buddies to hunt and not giving back, don't you?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: idahohuntr on May 17, 2016, 03:34:03 PM
I'm very curious what the defendant is claiming the false statements were...he has been criminally charged in the matter.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bob33 on May 17, 2016, 03:35:33 PM
Well actually, I have to say, I was glad that someone posted a link to the Yakima Herald article. I may not have seen it otherwise. I probably would have posted it myself if I had come across it first. This is also being discussed on Facebook and I'm sure there are comments being posted in the Yakima Herald as well.

thanks for the link to the article. I find it interesting how this one animal and hunter has created such a stir... from a different perspective, this person has probably put into WA state conservation (financially) MORE than this entire site full of hunters combine since just 2007. I don't know him, his ethics, or how rich he is either.. This animal was a conservation tool, used to draw money from us all for a chance of a lifetime, one ticket ever year for me too! Ethics and location maybe not so much. In the end, the money this one hunter has given has most likely made a direct impact in WA and now, the state will waste most of it (i bet) toward litigation and investigation fees. Why not just fix the book to allow this to occur, after all, these raffles and auction tags are just designed to make conservation dollars as I am led to understand in all the writings right? One draw, one animal, one hunter? Is it really that bad that this old rich dude paid to play or are we just jealous and casting stones?
Again, just considering the gain from all the moneys invested, not the ethical hunting of one man position. I find it more appalling when a person of this financial affluence takes the route of posting up a 100K piece of property his millionaire buddies to hunt and not giving back, don't you?
The use of money to justify illegal and unethical behavior will always occur, but that doesn't make it right.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 17, 2016, 06:37:56 PM
The story is in the Lewis County Chronicle & the Spokesman Review

http://www.spokesman.com/blogs/outdoors/2016/may/17/hunter-charged-shooting-celebrity-bull-elk-near-ellensburg/

http://www.chronline.com/crime/salkum-hunter-facing-charges-after-death-of-beloved-elk-named/article_c6877e8a-1b91-11e6-9a1e-039042d648b6.html
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: NOCK NOCK on May 17, 2016, 08:47:58 PM
 NOCK's  Top Ten List

1. kiticaashunter, Welcome to the site. Maybe think about going to the "new member" thread and tell us about yourself. Personally, I take more stock in what people I know tell me, more than from a stranger.  :twocents:

2. This is definitely not the 1st one of these type of permits(auction/raffle) that the defendant has had in his WA hunting career. The fact that he had to CALL ANYONE, including WDFW, to ask if he could shoot this bull is just silly. Come on, there can only be one reason the call was made, he knew it was not legal (easily understood in the regs) Why else would you call???  If he got a thumbs up to shoot, he had a scapegoat.

3. This is a prime example of why PUBLIC game animals should not be sold to the wealthy. I don't care how much money he has given the state, the animals are public property and should not be sold to the highest bidder.

4. Hunting to me is the act of going out into the forest, woods, wildland, sage, even an alfalfa field, and using my wits and skill to get within lethal range of a truly wild animal (not a semi tame one) , and then killing it to feed my family. The antlers are just a side bonus. What was done in this case was NOT HUNTING, more like shooting.

5. A lot of talk about how much $$ this individual has put into conservation in WA ST. If one TRULY cares about the well being of the critters, and that same person is very well off, why not just donate to the cause and not expect a permit in return? 

6. Absolutely do not understand how a person could be proud of acquiring a "trophy" in this manner.

7. kiticaashunter, Curious as to who the second phone call was to.  :dunno:

8. No, I am not jealous,  :rolleyes:, If I had that kinda money, I could find much more satisfying ways to hunt, ( like trying to kill a big game animal in all 50 states in 1 years time)

9. This is better than a soap opera.  :P

10. Thank You JDHasty, keep standing up for what you believe in.  :tup:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lokidog on May 17, 2016, 08:57:39 PM
 :yeah:

Anyone can sue anyone else, at any time, for any reason,  or for no reason. Whether or not it is successful is another issue, but at a minimum the party being sued will likely have some financial consequences. To an extent our legal system is a matter of "how much justice can you afford? " If someone with deep pockets wants to make someone else miserable, it's quite doable.

 Which is why the indivual pursuing the suit should have to front the estimated costs and have the balance paid in full before leaving the courthouse if they lose, or sit in jail until it's paid.

 My guess is that would reduce the backlog of cases and make people think twice before pursuing some of these BS suits. :twocents:

This is a whole other topic... but very true.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JJB11B on May 17, 2016, 09:04:23 PM
Interesting side note here....

"Bullwinkle often fed at the home of Mark and Frances Chmelewski, the couple who gave him that name.

“He would come into our yard and eat apples off our tree, and we’d sit and watch, just meters from him,” Mark Chmelewski said.

“Every year we’d say a little prayer that Bullwinkle would survive the hunting season because he was just such a beautiful, majestic animal.”"

 and then after google

http://www.dailyrecordnews.com/news/frances-chmelewski-is-new-kittitas-county-superior-court-judge/article_61b61d0a-162c-11e1-8f9d-001cc4c03286.html


Karma??
oh snap!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: coachcw on May 17, 2016, 09:07:02 PM
Wonder if the judge is a hunter ?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JimmyHoffa on May 17, 2016, 09:33:57 PM
Interesting side note here....

"Bullwinkle often fed at the home of Mark and Frances Chmelewski, the couple who gave him that name.

“He would come into our yard and eat apples off our tree, and we’d sit and watch, just meters from him,” Mark Chmelewski said.

“Every year we’d say a little prayer that Bullwinkle would survive the hunting season because he was just such a beautiful, majestic animal.”"

 and then after google

http://www.dailyrecordnews.com/news/frances-chmelewski-is-new-kittitas-county-superior-court-judge/article_61b61d0a-162c-11e1-8f9d-001cc4c03286.html


Karma??
oh snap!
Wonder if that actually helps him?  Can't the defense petition to bring in an unrelated judge from another county if there is some kind of conflict?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on May 17, 2016, 09:49:56 PM
 :yeah:  I see this helping the defense in justifying a change of venue as this article and this site paints a picture of "locals" already established as prejudice towards the person facing charges.

I'm not supporting him, I'm just stating a possibility. It's painted the picture of guilty before getting a fair trial by a juror of peers.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: mfswallace on May 17, 2016, 09:55:05 PM
:yeah:  I see this helping the defense in justifying a change of venue as this article and this site paints a picture of "locals" already established as prejudice towards the person facing charges.

I'm not supporting him, I'm just stating a possibility. It's painted the picture of guilty before getting a fair trial by a juror of peers.

Seems like there are enough supporters [ however misguided] from the valley as well so no need to change venue  :twocents:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on May 17, 2016, 10:13:39 PM
I see this helping the defense in justifying a change of venue

 I wouldn't mind seeing it moved to King County!

 

 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: TriggerMike on May 17, 2016, 11:01:00 PM
Is this the same guy and the same tag but 9 years ago? Interesting. Prior allegations and convictions don't usually help an alleged poachers case.

http://nwsportsmanmag.com/headlines/trophy-elk-hunter-must-stay-out-of-national-forests-for-2-years-after-pleading-guilty-to-charges-related-to-2007-governors-tag-kill/
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: csaaphill on May 17, 2016, 11:10:00 PM
Really, we're doing this again, a day after the previous lengthy topic was locked?  Can't people just be happy for now that the State has filed charges and now let the process work instead of all this needless discussion over a well beaten topic? 

I hope this thread is locked quickly so it doesn't keep popping up in my "show new replies to your post" page.
:chuckle: yea but what fun is that lol.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Shawn Ryan on May 17, 2016, 11:45:28 PM
Interesting side note here....

"Bullwinkle often fed at the home of Mark and Frances Chmelewski, the couple who gave him that name.

“He would come into our yard and eat apples off our tree, and we’d sit and watch, just meters from him,” Mark Chmelewski said.

“Every year we’d say a little prayer that Bullwinkle would survive the hunting season because he was just such a beautiful, majestic animal.”"

 and then after google

http://www.dailyrecordnews.com/news/frances-chmelewski-is-new-kittitas-county-superior-court-judge/article_61b61d0a-162c-11e1-8f9d-001cc4c03286.html


Karma??

Payback's a bit*×! and her stripper name is Karma!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 18, 2016, 05:21:09 AM
Interesting side note here....

"Bullwinkle often fed at the home of Mark and Frances Chmelewski, the couple who gave him that name.

“He would come into our yard and eat apples off our tree, and we’d sit and watch, just meters from him,” Mark Chmelewski said.

“Every year we’d say a little prayer that Bullwinkle would survive the hunting season because he was just such a beautiful, majestic animal.”"

 and then after google

http://www.dailyrecordnews.com/news/frances-chmelewski-is-new-kittitas-county-superior-court-judge/article_61b61d0a-162c-11e1-8f9d-001cc4c03286.html


Karma??
oh snap!
Wonder if that actually helps him?  Can't the defense petition to bring in an unrelated judge from another county if there is some kind of conflict?

They already have.  The judge he was to appear in front of in the arraignment is from Yakima I think.  It is not one of the local judges. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: danderson on May 18, 2016, 07:08:14 AM
It should be moved to Upper Kittitas County District court,  :twocents:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: WAcoyotehunter on May 18, 2016, 07:19:33 AM
I'm not going to comment on the legalities of it because I was not there nor the one that got supposed permission to hunt that area.

I do have a problem though with the part about how it's bad to shoot an animal in a field. Zero difference then shooting a cat out of a tree. Neither one takes any skill yet 99% of the people on this site would jump at the chance to shoot a lion in a tree. The first thread on this issue was started because guys were saying it wasn't much of a hunt. Not that it was illegal. Then that started after a page or two.

So for the guys that are saying it's not hunting get off your high horse.
You do a lot of hound hunting Brandon??
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: syoungs on May 18, 2016, 07:46:49 AM
I'm not going to comment on the legalities of it because I was not there nor the one that got supposed permission to hunt that area.

I do have a problem though with the part about how it's bad to shoot an animal in a field. Zero difference then shooting a cat out of a tree. Neither one takes any skill yet 99% of the people on this site would jump at the chance to shoot a lion in a tree. The first thread on this issue was started because guys were saying it wasn't much of a hunt. Not that it was illegal. Then that started after a page or two.

So for the guys that are saying it's not hunting get off your high horse.
You do a lot of hound hunting Brandon??

I would guess not lol
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 2MANY on May 18, 2016, 08:22:26 AM
Greed.

Some suffer from it.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: HighCountryHunter88 on May 18, 2016, 08:46:08 AM
I'm not going to comment on the legalities of it because I was not there nor the one that got supposed permission to hunt that area.

I do have a problem though with the part about how it's bad to shoot an animal in a field. Zero difference then shooting a cat out of a tree. Neither one takes any skill yet 99% of the people on this site would jump at the chance to shoot a lion in a tree. The first thread on this issue was started because guys were saying it wasn't much of a hunt. Not that it was illegal. Then that started after a page or two.

So for the guys that are saying it's not hunting get off your high horse.
You do a lot of hound hunting Brandon??

oooo you beat me to it!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: h20hunter on May 18, 2016, 08:49:24 AM
Drive to field, shoot elk.

Cut tracks, release hounds, track, follow, find, keep up and not fall off a cliff,  find treed cat,  decide to shoot,  if not, repeat again if you have the strength.

Sounds the same to me!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 18, 2016, 08:53:28 AM
Well actually, I have to say, I was glad that someone posted a link to the Yakima Herald article. I may not have seen it otherwise. I probably would have posted it myself if I had come across it first. This is also being discussed on Facebook and I'm sure there are comments being posted in the Yakima Herald as well.

thanks for the link to the article. I find it interesting how this one animal and hunter has created such a stir... from a different perspective, this person has probably put into WA state conservation (financially) MORE than this entire site full of hunters combine since just 2007. I don't know him, his ethics, or how rich he is either.. This animal was a conservation tool, used to draw money from us all for a chance of a lifetime, one ticket ever year for me too! Ethics and location maybe not so much. In the end, the money this one hunter has given has most likely made a direct impact in WA and now, the state will waste most of it (i bet) toward litigation and investigation fees. Why not just fix the book to allow this to occur, after all, these raffles and auction tags are just designed to make conservation dollars as I am led to understand in all the writings right? One draw, one animal, one hunter? Is it really that bad that this old rich dude paid to play or are we just jealous and casting stones?
Again, just considering the gain from all the moneys invested, not the ethical hunting of one man position. I find it more appalling when a person of this financial affluence takes the route of posting up a 100K piece of property his millionaire buddies to hunt and not giving back, don't you?

So should he also be able to shoot a Record Book Roosevelt in Grays Harbor, Lewis or Pacific County?  If not why not?  Here, let me answer that for ya:  Because that South Central Washington - Big Game Raffle Tag is not good there.  WTH is so hard to figure out about that.

Now, re: the "Bullwinkle" aspects of this - just because something is legal, is it a smart thing to do?   Well, irrespective of the legal issues, Scott Sandsberry was talking with residents and property owners all around the area who had absolutely no idea that any law was broken.   They were PO'd, and they thought that shooting this bull was wrong and they were talking to Scott Sandsberry about why they thought it was wrong, but they had no idea that the tag he used to kill the bull with came with this restriction: 
South Central Washington - Big Game $ 17.00 per ticket
Elk: Any 300 or 500 series GMU open to elk hunting except GMUs not open to branch antlered bull elk hunting
http://wdfw.wa.gov/hunting/permits/raffles/index.html   
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: teanawayslayer on May 18, 2016, 09:01:20 AM
That article doesn't paint a great picture for hunting in general...
Not a good deal any way you look at it.
I agree 100%.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: whacker1 on May 18, 2016, 09:05:21 AM
following along for the ride
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bearpaw on May 18, 2016, 09:16:21 AM
I'm not going to comment on the legalities of it because I was not there nor the one that got supposed permission to hunt that area.

I do have a problem though with the part about how it's bad to shoot an animal in a field. Zero difference then shooting a cat out of a tree. Neither one takes any skill yet 99% of the people on this site would jump at the chance to shoot a lion in a tree. The first thread on this issue was started because guys were saying it wasn't much of a hunt. Not that it was illegal. Then that started after a page or two.

So for the guys that are saying it's not hunting get off your high horse.
You do a lot of hound hunting Brandon??

oooo you beat me to it!

he likely has never cougar hunted....

I've been lucky enough to do many different hunts, including hunts in several other countries, cougar hunting is still my favorite hunt. Some of the best cougar hunts have ended by taking photos and leaving the cat in the tree! The most rewarding part is watching the young hounds learn and develop into experienced lion hounds. Almost anyone can become successful in many types of hunting, but to be a top notch hound hunter requires incredible dedication by the hunter and a very sharp learning curve. After all the time and work to get good at hound hunting, you can take your dogs to field, search for days and sometimes weeks to find a good track, you and your dogs can experience the thrill of the hunt, hopefully you catch the cat and get photos of the hunted, and then you leave the hunted animal unharmed in the wild after experiencing the hunt of lifetime. Hunting really can't get any better than that!

For those that choose to notch a cougar tag you then have some of the best meat in the woods!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: dscubame on May 18, 2016, 09:26:28 AM
following along for the ride

The ride sucks I may suggest you get off at the first stop.  It is like a bad groundhog day, a scratched broken record.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: birddogdad on May 18, 2016, 10:02:55 AM
Well actually, I have to say, I was glad that someone posted a link to the Yakima Herald article. I may not have seen it otherwise. I probably would have posted it myself if I had come across it first. This is also being discussed on Facebook and I'm sure there are comments being posted in the Yakima Herald as well.

thanks for the link to the article. I find it interesting how this one animal and hunter has created such a stir... from a different perspective, this person has probably put into WA state conservation (financially) MORE than this entire site full of hunters combine since just 2007. I don't know him, his ethics, or how rich he is either.. This animal was a conservation tool, used to draw money from us all for a chance of a lifetime, one ticket ever year for me too! Ethics and location maybe not so much. In the end, the money this one hunter has given has most likely made a direct impact in WA and now, the state will waste most of it (i bet) toward litigation and investigation fees. Why not just fix the book to allow this to occur, after all, these raffles and auction tags are just designed to make conservation dollars as I am led to understand in all the writings right? One draw, one animal, one hunter? Is it really that bad that this old rich dude paid to play or are we just jealous and casting stones?
Again, just considering the gain from all the moneys invested, not the ethical hunting of one man position. I find it more appalling when a person of this financial affluence takes the route of posting up a 100K piece of property his millionaire buddies to hunt and not giving back, don't you?

So should he also be able to shoot a Record Book Roosevelt in Grays Harbor, Lewis or Pacific County?  If not why not?  Here, let me answer that for ya:  Because that South Central Washington - Big Game Raffle Tag is not good there.  WTH is so hard to figure out about that.

Now, re: the "Bullwinkle" aspects of this - just because something is legal, is it a smart thing to do?   Well, irrespective of the legal issues, Scott Sandsberry was talking with residents and property owners all around the area who had absolutely no idea that any law was broken.   They were PO'd, and they thought that shooting this bull was wrong and they were talking to Scott Sandsberry about why they thought it was wrong, but they had no idea that the tag he used to kill the bull with came with this restriction: 
South Central Washington - Big Game $ 17.00 per ticket
Elk: Any 300 or 500 series GMU open to elk hunting except GMUs not open to branch antlered bull elk hunting
http://wdfw.wa.gov/hunting/permits/raffles/index.html   

again I don't agree with the whole thing he did. was just saying that he definitely has contributed large sums to the state and now they will just use it up in court proceedings. reviews show suspect activities since 2007, why blame just him? allowing continued contributions from 2007 forward is frankly a state swing and a miss. since this raffle and auction is all about the money, the state WDFW didn't step in and prevent his participation after past adjudicated activity. To me, its not hard to understand JD, my point was either they (state) cares or they are just going thru motions, he was as I understand, forced off lands for a couple years by courts after 2007/8 raffle/auction tag episode yet still allowed to throw money into the state hoppers and participate in follow on auctions and raffles, that was the major state miss. Now, the state industry will waste money, not using it for conservation in this process. This person has as I read in articles, a fairly unlimited resources to dip from, how much will the state spend to pursue him? I would think that WDFW raffles and auctions programs could restrict individual participation and everyone moves on and conservation dollars are used for conservation. I get it upsets everyone here, myself included, but I blame more than the act or individual here...
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Alchase on May 18, 2016, 10:26:36 AM
Ironic that the day after Dale closes down the thread, this article comes out and starts a whole new one.

Not ironic, disrespectful.


 The Yakima Herald disrespected Dale? Really?

I guess you did say article, I mis read that. I meant , the need to post this article knowing damn well it would be a continuation of the recently locked thread is disrespectful to this forum and Bearpaw.

I agree. There's a reason the other one was shut down. Special thanks to JDHasty for reviving this hot mess.
:bash:

Due to the reason given of legal threats for removing the other thread I think this goes way past disrespectful.  I am very suprised this forum continues to let this individual have access knowing his actions may lead to legal headaches for them.

I am glad "other" sources are finally showing some interest in this story.

I also find the threatening this forum, and or members of this forum with lawsuits over this very telling about the individual doing the threatening.

See you can have all the money in the world and you can sue everyone who disagrees with you. If you are rich enough, you probably will win.

Does that make you right?

Not where I come from.

In your first few posts, you came on here insinuating (if not threatening) some people who post here with legal action.



I personally do not know either of you. if anyone should not be allowed to post, I would rather it be someone who has only brought threats of lawsuit to the forum, rather then someone who is a regular contributor who is passionately trying to ensure this whole issue does not get swept under the rug, just because the individual involved has money.

There is something called integrity, money can't buy it, and you can't silence people with threats, and  still hope to earn it.






Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: greenhead_killer on May 18, 2016, 11:32:07 AM
Well said alchase. I happened to see this same article on another hunting forum today. People are talking about it everywhere. Wonder if they will be charged too with putting their opinions online as well and sharing printed news??
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Gringo31 on May 18, 2016, 12:26:27 PM
See how easy this would have gone if all of the rules were followed?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jkthomps on May 18, 2016, 03:36:30 PM
 :beatdeadhorse:

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jkthomps on May 18, 2016, 03:39:37 PM
Wait, wasn't "Bullwinkle" a moose?  :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 18, 2016, 03:47:34 PM
It's not over yet.  Anybody got a squirrel rifle handy? 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on May 18, 2016, 03:59:30 PM
Squirrel!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: ctwiggs1 on May 18, 2016, 04:12:54 PM
In my youth, I was blessed to be on several hound "hunts" to recollar cougar with the WDFW.  Some of the best memories of my teenage years!

I can tell you with full certainty that it doesn't even remotely compare to shooting an elk in the field.  There is a LOT of front end work that goes into hound hunting and it's not a walk in the park mid process either.

I will have to sample cougar meat sometime to see if I am willing to kill one or not though. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on May 18, 2016, 04:17:32 PM
In my youth, I was blessed to be on several hound "hunts" to recollar cougar with the WDFW.  Some of the best memories of my teenage years!

I can tell you with full certainty that it doesn't even remotely compare to shooting an elk in the field.  There is a LOT of front end work that goes into hound hunting and it's not a walk in the park mid process either.

I will have to sample cougar meat sometime to see if I am willing to kill one or not though.
It's delicious, you won't be disappointed.  Kind of like pork/chicken cross.  Great in stir fry with vegies over rice.  :drool:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: ctwiggs1 on May 18, 2016, 05:00:32 PM
Any idea where you can buy it commercially?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JJB11B on May 18, 2016, 05:09:55 PM
I find lots of cougars in dive bars, they normally taste like cigarettes and bloody Mary's to me
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: TVHunts on May 18, 2016, 05:26:16 PM
I find lots of cougars in dive bars, they normally taste like cigarettes and bloody Mary's to me
Awesome  :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jkthomps on May 18, 2016, 06:27:54 PM
I find lots of cougars in dive bars, they normally taste like cigarettes and bloody Mary's to me
😂 hahaha
Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: emac on May 18, 2016, 09:45:53 PM
I find lots of cougars in dive bars, they normally taste like cigarettes and bloody Mary's to me
Now that is funny poop right there

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jmscon on May 18, 2016, 11:03:01 PM
Just because this guy has contributed so much money to conservation should the state turn a blind eye to what he appears to have done? Just because he wins the auction doesn't mean there isn't someone else right behind him making a bid. The state will not suffer if this guy is convicted and can't bid on auctions, except for the court costs.

I have mixed feelings about the auction and raffle tags. I'm all for the auctions and the money it brings in. But the raffles, I've only bought tickets a couple of times and feel like the only time I'd have a chance would be if I spend a ton on tickets or if WDFW puts a limit on the number of tickets per person. I think that more people would buy in and offset the reduction from single people buying tons of tickets.

If he is convicted I hope they throw the book at him! If he is found innocent or makes a deal, I hope that the state can make conditions on his hunting privileges. If someone at WDFW gave him permission, that person should be canned and ticketed for aiding in illegal harvest!  :twocents:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Gringo31 on May 19, 2016, 07:21:55 AM
I find it funny that "some guy" comes on here to

1.  Straighten things out
2.  Says he won't say anything because it is an ongoing investigation.
3.  Says how many people will be served or sued for things they have said.
 
and my favorite

4.  Throws out a person's name from WDFW who HE says is to blame.....   :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: ctwiggs1 on May 19, 2016, 07:25:18 AM
I find it funny that "some guy" comes on here to

1.  Straighten things out
2.  Says he won't say anything because it is an ongoing investigation.
3.  Says how many people will be served or sued for things they have said.
 
and my favorite

4.  Throws out a person's name from WDFW who HE says is to blame.....   :chuckle:

What's the internet good for if not for acting tough?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bango skank on May 19, 2016, 07:54:59 AM
I find it funny that "some guy" comes on here to

1.  Straighten things out
2.  Says he won't say anything because it is an ongoing investigation.
3.  Says how many people will be served or sued for things they have said.
 
and my favorite

4.  Throws out a person's name from WDFW who HE says is to blame.....   :chuckle:

What's the internet good for if not for acting tough?

Porn
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: justyhntr on May 19, 2016, 11:07:42 AM
I find it funny that "some guy" comes on here to

1.  Straighten things out
2.  Says he won't say anything because it is an ongoing investigation.
3.  Says how many people will be served or sued for things they have said.
 
and my favorite

4.  Throws out a person's name from WDFW who HE says is to blame.....   :chuckle:

What's the internet good for if not for acting tough?

Porn
My favorite are the photos and comments by Ms. Information .  :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: pianoman9701 on May 19, 2016, 11:28:34 AM
Any idea where you can buy it commercially?

There's a Cambodian guy in Pierce Co. who would probably sell you some.  8)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: pianoman9701 on May 19, 2016, 11:36:02 AM
Well actually, I have to say, I was glad that someone posted a link to the Yakima Herald article. I may not have seen it otherwise. I probably would have posted it myself if I had come across it first. This is also being discussed on Facebook and I'm sure there are comments being posted in the Yakima Herald as well.

thanks for the link to the article. I find it interesting how this one animal and hunter has created such a stir... from a different perspective, this person has probably put into WA state conservation (financially) MORE than this entire site full of hunters combine since just 2007. I don't know him, his ethics, or how rich he is either.. This animal was a conservation tool, used to draw money from us all for a chance of a lifetime, one ticket ever year for me too! Ethics and location maybe not so much. In the end, the money this one hunter has given has most likely made a direct impact in WA and now, the state will waste most of it (i bet) toward litigation and investigation fees. Why not just fix the book to allow this to occur, after all, these raffles and auction tags are just designed to make conservation dollars as I am led to understand in all the writings right? One draw, one animal, one hunter? Is it really that bad that this old rich dude paid to play or are we just jealous and casting stones?
Again, just considering the gain from all the moneys invested, not the ethical hunting of one man position. I find it more appalling when a person of this financial affluence takes the route of posting up a 100K piece of property his millionaire buddies to hunt and not giving back, don't you?

So should he also be able to shoot a Record Book Roosevelt in Grays Harbor, Lewis or Pacific County?  If not why not?  Here, let me answer that for ya:  Because that South Central Washington - Big Game Raffle Tag is not good there.  WTH is so hard to figure out about that.

Now, re: the "Bullwinkle" aspects of this - just because something is legal, is it a smart thing to do?   Well, irrespective of the legal issues, Scott Sandsberry was talking with residents and property owners all around the area who had absolutely no idea that any law was broken.   They were PO'd, and they thought that shooting this bull was wrong and they were talking to Scott Sandsberry about why they thought it was wrong, but they had no idea that the tag he used to kill the bull with came with this restriction: 
South Central Washington - Big Game $ 17.00 per ticket
Elk: Any 300 or 500 series GMU open to elk hunting except GMUs not open to branch antlered bull elk hunting
http://wdfw.wa.gov/hunting/permits/raffles/index.html   

again I don't agree with the whole thing he did. was just saying that he definitely has contributed large sums to the state and now they will just use it up in court proceedings. reviews show suspect activities since 2007, why blame just him? allowing continued contributions from 2007 forward is frankly a state swing and a miss. since this raffle and auction is all about the money, the state WDFW didn't step in and prevent his participation after past adjudicated activity. To me, its not hard to understand JD, my point was either they (state) cares or they are just going thru motions, he was as I understand, forced off lands for a couple years by courts after 2007/8 raffle/auction tag episode yet still allowed to throw money into the state hoppers and participate in follow on auctions and raffles, that was the major state miss. Now, the state industry will waste money, not using it for conservation in this process. This person has as I read in articles, a fairly unlimited resources to dip from, how much will the state spend to pursue him? I would think that WDFW raffles and auctions programs could restrict individual participation and everyone moves on and conservation dollars are used for conservation. I get it upsets everyone here, myself included, but I blame more than the act or individual here...

...then your blame is misplaced. All due respects, Birddogdad, it's like blaming "an atmosphere of violence" to justify a gangsta's murdering someone. He knew the rules, probably better than anyone else, especially since he'd been bitten before. You blame the crime on the criminal.
Title: Who's Responsibility Is It?
Post by: JDHasty on May 19, 2016, 12:05:53 PM
Well actually, I have to say, I was glad that someone posted a link to the Yakima Herald article. I may not have seen it otherwise. I probably would have posted it myself if I had come across it first. This is also being discussed on Facebook and I'm sure there are comments being posted in the Yakima Herald as well.

thanks for the link to the article. I find it interesting how this one animal and hunter has created such a stir... from a different perspective, this person has probably put into WA state conservation (financially) MORE than this entire site full of hunters combine since just 2007. I don't know him, his ethics, or how rich he is either.. This animal was a conservation tool, used to draw money from us all for a chance of a lifetime, one ticket ever year for me too! Ethics and location maybe not so much. In the end, the money this one hunter has given has most likely made a direct impact in WA and now, the state will waste most of it (i bet) toward litigation and investigation fees. Why not just fix the book to allow this to occur, after all, these raffles and auction tags are just designed to make conservation dollars as I am led to understand in all the writings right? One draw, one animal, one hunter? Is it really that bad that this old rich dude paid to play or are we just jealous and casting stones?
Again, just considering the gain from all the moneys invested, not the ethical hunting of one man position. I find it more appalling when a person of this financial affluence takes the route of posting up a 100K piece of property his millionaire buddies to hunt and not giving back, don't you?

So should he also be able to shoot a Record Book Roosevelt in Grays Harbor, Lewis or Pacific County?  If not why not?  Here, let me answer that for ya:  Because that South Central Washington - Big Game Raffle Tag is not good there.  WTH is so hard to figure out about that.

Now, re: the "Bullwinkle" aspects of this - just because something is legal, is it a smart thing to do?   Well, irrespective of the legal issues, Scott Sandsberry was talking with residents and property owners all around the area who had absolutely no idea that any law was broken.   They were PO'd, and they thought that shooting this bull was wrong and they were talking to Scott Sandsberry about why they thought it was wrong, but they had no idea that the tag he used to kill the bull with came with this restriction: 
South Central Washington - Big Game $ 17.00 per ticket
Elk: Any 300 or 500 series GMU open to elk hunting except GMUs not open to branch antlered bull elk hunting
http://wdfw.wa.gov/hunting/permits/raffles/index.html   

again I don't agree with the whole thing he did. was just saying that he definitely has contributed large sums to the state and now they will just use it up in court proceedings. reviews show suspect activities since 2007, why blame just him? allowing continued contributions from 2007 forward is frankly a state swing and a miss. since this raffle and auction is all about the money, the state WDFW didn't step in and prevent his participation after past adjudicated activity. To me, its not hard to understand JD, my point was either they (state) cares or they are just going thru motions, he was as I understand, forced off lands for a couple years by courts after 2007/8 raffle/auction tag episode yet still allowed to throw money into the state hoppers and participate in follow on auctions and raffles, that was the major state miss. Now, the state industry will waste money, not using it for conservation in this process. This person has as I read in articles, a fairly unlimited resources to dip from, how much will the state spend to pursue him? I would think that WDFW raffles and auctions programs could restrict individual participation and everyone moves on and conservation dollars are used for conservation. I get it upsets everyone here, myself included, but I blame more than the act or individual here...

...then your blame is misplaced. All due respects, Birddogdad, it's like blaming "an atmosphere of violence" to justify a gangsta's murdering someone. He knew the rules, probably better than anyone else, especially since he'd been bitten before. You blame the crime on the criminal.

There are kids as young as eight and nine in Hunter Education classes every session.  Who's responsibility is it to know the rules?  -  is one of the questions that are asked every session and I have yet to hear a student not get this one right.  When an instructor asks that question hands go up or students blurt out "It is my responsibility."
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on May 19, 2016, 12:17:56 PM
I find it funny that "some guy" comes on here to

1.  Straighten things out
2.  Says he won't say anything because it is an ongoing investigation.
3.  Says how many people will be served or sued for things they have said.
 
and my favorite

4.  Throws out a person's name from WDFW who HE says is to blame.....   :chuckle:

Not sure what's funny about that? And I didn't just throw out a name. I gave the name of the officer that gave clear permission to shoot the bull knowing exactly where it was at. If you think that's funny or something that's your rigbt.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 19, 2016, 12:25:57 PM
I find it funny that "some guy" comes on here to

1.  Straighten things out
2.  Says he won't say anything because it is an ongoing investigation.
3.  Says how many people will be served or sued for things they have said.
 
and my favorite

4.  Throws out a person's name from WDFW who HE says is to blame.....   :chuckle:

Not sure what's funny about that? And I didn't just throw out a name. I gave the name of the officer that gave clear permission to shoot the bull knowing exactly where it was at. If you think that's funny or something that's your rigbt.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: teanawayslayer on May 19, 2016, 12:27:20 PM
I find it funny that "some guy" comes on here to

1.  Straighten things out
2.  Says he won't say anything because it is an ongoing investigation.
3.  Says how many people will be served or sued for things they have said.
 
and my favorite

4.  Throws out a person's name from WDFW who HE says is to blame.....   :chuckle:

Not sure what's funny about that? And I didn't just throw out a name. I gave the name of the officer that gave clear permission to shoot the bull knowing exactly where it was at. If you think that's funny or something that's your rigbt.
so why would a guy that sent the case the the prosecutors office send it there if there were no laws violated? Oh wait that's right you don't want to talk about the case!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on May 19, 2016, 12:38:48 PM
I find it funny that "some guy" comes on here to

1.  Straighten things out
2.  Says he won't say anything because it is an ongoing investigation.
3.  Says how many people will be served or sued for things they have said.
 
and my favorite

4.  Throws out a person's name from WDFW who HE says is to blame.....   :chuckle:

Not sure what's funny about that? And I didn't just throw out a name. I gave the name of the officer that gave clear permission to shoot the bull knowing exactly where it was at. If you think that's funny or something that's your rigbt.

Seems unlikely someone with a tag link that would risk a chance of getting in trouble at least you'd hope not

I'm not going to comment on any details while this case is open  or before the person on this forum gets served. I will tell you great steps were taken to do the right thing.

And the right thing was?  :chuckle:

Welcome to the site. Pretty big first couple of posts.

And who is getting served if you don't mind me asking.

Thank you for the welcome.  I signed up to this forum to hopefully clear things up some. There has been a lot of false information posted on this site. A call was made to the game department asking if it was ok to shoot the bull where it located. After Morgan Grant from the game department checked into it another phone conversation took place and the hunters were told they absolutely could harvest that bull with that tag at that location. If in fact the info given was wrong the game department is the one to be blamed.

As for the person on here that will be dealing with legal issues, I can't tell you who that is at this point. But if you read the thread on this topic that was removed it would be really easy for you to guess who.

Hopefully your info is accurate. Wouldn't want Mr. Grant filing a lawsuit against you.
:tup:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 19, 2016, 12:39:57 PM
I find it funny that "some guy" comes on here to

1.  Straighten things out
2.  Says he won't say anything because it is an ongoing investigation.
3.  Says how many people will be served or sued for things they have said.
 
and my favorite

4.  Throws out a person's name from WDFW who HE says is to blame.....   :chuckle:

Not sure what's funny about that? And I didn't just throw out a name. I gave the name of the officer that gave clear permission to shoot the bull knowing exactly where it was at. If you think that's funny or something that's your rigbt.

Seems unlikely someone with a tag link that would risk a chance of getting in trouble at least you'd hope not

I'm not going to comment on any details while this case is open  or before the person on this forum gets served. I will tell you great steps were taken to do the right thing.

And the right thing was?  :chuckle:

Welcome to the site. Pretty big first couple of posts.

And who is getting served if you don't mind me asking.

Thank you for the welcome.  I signed up to this forum to hopefully clear things up some. There has been a lot of false information posted on this site. A call was made to the game department asking if it was ok to shoot the bull where it located. After Morgan Grant from the game department checked into it another phone conversation took place and the hunters were told they absolutely could harvest that bull with that tag at that location. If in fact the info given was wrong the game department is the one to be blamed.

As for the person on here that will be dealing with legal issues, I can't tell you who that is at this point. But if you read the thread on this topic that was removed it would be really easy for you to guess who.

Hopefully your info is accurate. Wouldn't want Mr. Grant filing a lawsuit against you.
:tup:

 :tup:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 2MANY on May 19, 2016, 01:07:14 PM
"A call was made to the game department asking if it was ok to shoot the bull where it located. After Morgan Grant from the game department checked into it another phone conversation took place and the hunters were told they absolutely could harvest that bull with that tag at that location."

This crap just makes me shake my head.
WHAT A HUNT!!!!!!
Cue in phone ringing, guy answering, take em Elmer, Bang!!!

An elk hunt?????????
Yea right.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Gringo31 on May 19, 2016, 01:10:14 PM
Quote
Not sure what's funny about that? And I didn't just throw out a name. I gave the name of the officer that gave clear permission to shoot the bull knowing exactly where it was at. If you think that's funny or something that's your right.

Let me explain a bit further why I've exercised my right to find this funny...

You said

Quote
I'm not going to comment on any details while this case is open  
and
Quote
I haven't and won't say anything that will have any effect on either issue.

So.....you won't say anything, but then you used a persons full real name on why you feel is to blame.

Yep..... I still find that funny  :chuckle:

In the mean time, keep telling everyone that they are going to get sued, that they shouldn't say anything..... while clearly you don't walk your talk.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on May 19, 2016, 01:57:47 PM
Quote from: link=topic=195504.msg2591551#msg2591551 date=1463327889
Quote from: link=topic=195504.msg2591550#msg2591550 date=1463327674
Quote from: link=topic=195504.msg2591499#msg2591499 date=1463321301
There has been a lot of false information posted on this site. A call was made to the game department asking if it was ok to shoot the bull where it located. After Morgan Grant from the game department checked into it another phone conversation took place and the hunters were told they absolutely could harvest that bull with that tag at that location.

 Has anyone contacted this guy to confirm this?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: pianoman9701 on May 19, 2016, 02:02:56 PM
Well, this is all very dramatic. Do we know the name of the person who spoke with Mr. Grant? Is it possible he's a "guide" who does a lot of celebrity guiding? This could explain a lot.  :chuckle: :chuckle: It's really fun, you know, until someone puts an eye out!!! :yike:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: idahohuntr on May 19, 2016, 02:44:44 PM
I find it funny that "some guy" comes on here to

1.  Straighten things out
2.  Says he won't say anything because it is an ongoing investigation.
3.  Says how many people will be served or sued for things they have said.
 
and my favorite

4.  Throws out a person's name from WDFW who HE says is to blame.....   :chuckle:

Not sure what's funny about that? And I didn't just throw out a name. I gave the name of the officer that gave clear permission to shoot the bull knowing exactly where it was at. If you think that's funny or something that's your rigbt.
Why did you call the game department to ask if you knew exactly which unit the bull was located?  What about the regulations caused you concern that you were hunting in a closed unit and needed an officers clarification or permission - the latter for which he does not have authority? 

Bet you wish you had just went and hunted somewhere else now don't you  :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 19, 2016, 02:57:53 PM
From the start this was never going to end well. 

Very early on I  was in downtown Ellensburg having a burger with friends, a local Kittitas Valley guy said:  What were they thinking  -  Is this guy trying to be this year's recipient of the Dr Walter Palmer DDS Lifetime Achievement Award in the Patio Elk category?

I just can't get my mind around how anyone could have gotten the notion in their head that this scheme was viable.   

 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on May 19, 2016, 04:22:21 PM
Man, same debacle, different thread. :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Alchase on May 19, 2016, 06:20:50 PM
I find it funny that "some guy" comes on here to

1.  Straighten things out
2.  Says he won't say anything because it is an ongoing investigation.
3.  Says how many people will be served or sued for things they have said.
 
and my favorite

4.  Throws out a person's name from WDFW who HE says is to blame.....   :chuckle:

Not sure what's funny about that? And I didn't just throw out a name. I gave the name of the officer that gave clear permission to shoot the bull knowing exactly where it was at. If you think that's funny or something that's your rigbt.

Wait one minute ............. Ok I have my BS boots on, continue

Or would you rather just threaten me with a lawsuit as well?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jjhunter on May 19, 2016, 06:23:00 PM
Soooo.....

Super Trooper gave the kill order?   :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Whitenuckles on May 19, 2016, 06:35:36 PM
 This guy should be charged with a FELONY! No more hunting, no more guns!

Makes me sick. What a pathetic excuse for a man.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Colville on May 19, 2016, 06:52:12 PM
Can someone point me to the RCW or WDFW enacting legislation that grants WDFW enforcement officers the authority to suspend, temporarily or situationally, the issued regulations of the department?

Oh, and is there anything but a "he said" that mr Grant gave his permission verbally? Anything that documents his action? Recording? Text? Email? 

Assuming this permission could be documented, it seems to me it would only be evidence that the Sgt and the hunter should both be prosecuted, rather than a basis that the hunter is without fault. If a police officer gives me "permission" to steal a car, I'm pretty sure I'm still going to jail if another officer arrests me for it.  Primarily because I don't hear anyone claiming that the legality was in question, only whether or not they tried to get someone to give them extrajudicial Okee Dokee.

Feel free to correct me if that's wrong. But I have seen nothing that suggests that anyone misunderstood the unit the game was in or if it had any branch antlered season that would make it open to the tag holder.  I'd have a slightly different opinion if someone was making a reasonable claim that the unit location was unclear or that a reg was ambiguous and they needed WDFW to clear it up, haven't seen that.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 19, 2016, 07:42:27 PM
Here's another story.

http://www.wideopenspaces.com/high-profile-hunter-shoots-famous-elk-in-restricted-pasture-outrage-follows/
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Miles on May 19, 2016, 07:45:17 PM
Sounds like the same story.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 19, 2016, 07:48:21 PM
Sounds like the same story.

Looks like it is based on the Yakima Herald story.  A friend sent me the link, I have never heard of that website.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Alchase on May 19, 2016, 07:58:32 PM
LOL,
list of people they will have to sue gets longer every day.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Buckmark on May 19, 2016, 08:04:20 PM
A LEO officer whether preset or on the phone can not change then law, he or she can not change the law, rules, rcw's or reg's on the fly..
They can not issue someone the right to circumnavigate the rules, laws, game regs etc and the time....

My friend the WSP can not tell, me it's ok to drive home drunk no more than a WDFW Officer can tell someone it is ok to shoot an animal in a area closed to that for everyone....sorry but i call BS. It is not a judgment call or an interpretation,  the hunter was in an area where it was not legal and no matter what some paid LEO told him it was not legal!!!!


Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 19, 2016, 08:10:39 PM
That Wideopenspaces story was not posted by a fan of Todd Reichert.  I had to go downstairs to read it, it kept crashing my old beater of an iPad.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Skillet on May 19, 2016, 08:53:42 PM
A LEO officer whether preset or on the phone can not change then law, he or she can not change the law, rules, rcw's or reg's on the fly..
They can not issue someone the right to circumnavigate the rules, laws, game regs etc and the time....

My friend the WSP can not tell, me it's ok to drive home drunk no more than a WDFW Officer can tell someone it is ok to shoot an animal in a area closed to that for everyone....sorry but i call BS. It is not a judgment call or an interpretation,  the hunter was in an area where it was not legal and no matter what some paid LEO told him it was not legal!!!!

This is all very true, BUT -
The punishment will depend on how naive the judge is, and how much of a "I'm just a dumb old hunter" face the defendant can hang on his head. 

In a completely unrelated train of thought, the fact that one of the worst known poachers in Washington history, Bona Bunphoath, got only 30 days community service and 60 days home detention just popped into my head.  Not sure why.  :dunno:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bean Counter on May 19, 2016, 08:56:25 PM
This guy should be charged with a FELONY! No more hunting, no more guns!

Makes me sick. What a pathetic excuse for a man.

Sorry but you lose people like me here. This is where I get off the train.

Voting restrictions, long prison time, and firearms removal ought be reserved for the most heinous in society: child molesters, murderers, Liberals, etc.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bango skank on May 19, 2016, 09:05:41 PM
Can someone point me to the RCW or WDFW enacting legislation that grants WDFW enforcement officers the authority to suspend, temporarily or situationally, the issued regulations of the department?

Oh, and is there anything but a "he said" that mr Grant gave his permission verbally? Anything that documents his action? Recording? Text? Email? 

Assuming this permission could be documented, it seems to me it would only be evidence that the Sgt and the hunter should both be prosecuted, rather than a basis that the hunter is without fault. If a police officer gives me "permission" to steal a car, I'm pretty sure I'm still going to jail if another officer arrests me for it.  Primarily because I don't hear anyone claiming that the legality was in question, only whether or not they tried to get someone to give them extrajudicial Okee Dokee.

Feel free to correct me if that's wrong. But I have seen nothing that suggests that anyone misunderstood the unit the game was in or if it had any branch antlered season that would make it open to the tag holder.  I'd have a slightly different opinion if someone was making a reasonable claim that the unit location was unclear or that a reg was ambiguous and they needed WDFW to clear it up, haven't seen that.

Well said.  Pretty much what i wanted to say, but i lacked the motivation to carefully consider my words enough to put them together as coherently and maturely.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Whitenuckles on May 19, 2016, 09:17:19 PM
This guy should be charged with a FELONY! No more hunting, no more guns!

Makes me sick. What a pathetic excuse for a man.

Sorry but you lose people like me here. This is where I get off the train.

Voting restrictions, long prison time, and firearms removal ought be reserved for the most heinous in society: child molesters, murderers, Liberals, etc.
If the guy broke the law while hunting and using a firearm, and supposably multiple times. He absolutely should NOT have the right and privilege to do it again.  :twocents:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bean Counter on May 19, 2016, 10:00:58 PM
Hmm.. Well to me, if something is a right, it is NOT a privilege. The RKBA is a right. Ergo it must never be looked at as a privilege. I reject the notion that hunting is a privilege but absent a constitutional amendment defining it as a right then its a matter of state law where most call it a privilege. Restrict it as you will according to the legislative process--I don't want to see people go to prison for a single animal involving a first time offense. Big fines? Maybe. Prison time? Not agreeing to that. Just my :twocents:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Whitenuckles on May 19, 2016, 10:21:05 PM
Hmm.. Well to me, if something is a right, it is NOT a privilege. The RKBA is a right. Ergo it must never be looked at as a privilege. I reject the notion that hunting is a privilege but absent a constitutional amendment defining it as a right then its a matter of state law where most call it a privilege. Restrict it as you will according to the legislative process--I don't want to see people go to prison for a single animal involving a first time offense. Big fines? Maybe. Prison time? Not agreeing to that. Just my :twocents:


*censored* I see no difference here. I personally think that the life of a bull is worth more than money.

 But, like I said, I see your side of it too. ;)
 


(unsubstantiated claim removed)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: mfswallace on May 19, 2016, 10:24:31 PM
Hmm.. Well to me, if something is a right, it is NOT a privilege. The RKBA is a right. Ergo it must never be looked at as a privilege. I reject the notion that hunting is a privilege but absent a constitutional amendment defining it as a right then its a matter of state law where most call it a privilege. Restrict it as you will according to the legislative process--I don't want to see people go to prison for a single animal involving a first time offense. Big fines? Maybe. Prison time? Not agreeing to that. Just my :twocents:

Not his first rodeo :o
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Whitenuckles on May 19, 2016, 10:30:04 PM
Hmm.. Well to me, if something is a right, it is NOT a privilege. The RKBA is a right. Ergo it must never be looked at as a privilege. I reject the notion that hunting is a privilege but absent a constitutional amendment defining it as a right then its a matter of state law where most call it a privilege. Restrict it as you will according to the legislative process--I don't want to see people go to prison for a single animal involving a first time offense. Big fines? Maybe. Prison time? Not agreeing to that. Just my :twocents:

Not his first rodeo :o

*censored*


(unsubstantiated claim removed)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bean Counter on May 19, 2016, 10:37:17 PM
My opinions are general in nature and aren't necessarily a perspective on this particular case.

Organized, commercial poaching rings and repeat offenders should have the heat turned up.  :twocents:  IDK whether that's this case or not.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bearpaw on May 20, 2016, 01:29:16 AM
I don't see a problem with citing other news stories or discussing this issue. The last topic was removed due to unsubstantiated accusations that were potentially slanderous, we were asked to remove the topic or risk legal action. If you want this topic to remain on the forum please do not post unsubstantiated accusations or forum management will be forced to remove the topic.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 20, 2016, 05:30:49 AM
OK, here are some facts that one individual who is involved in this latest case would rather you not know, but are easily validated by going online?

1 - Todd Reichert hired Helicopter services in 2007
2 - Todd Reichert plead guilty in 2012 to having lied about having paid Jon Wick to take him to an elk
3 - The helicopter was used by Jon Wick for spotting elk from the air w/in 24 hours his clandestine (see above Todd Reichert did not want anyone to know he was Wick's client) hunting.

http://www.lagrandeobserver.com/csp/mediapool/sites/LaGrandeObserver/LocalState/story.csp?cid=4089345&sid=824&fid=151

to be continued...


 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: popeshawnpaul on May 20, 2016, 07:51:24 AM
So we now have proposed valid info informing that WDFW officer Grant and other WDFW actors reportedly authorized the harvest of this elk.  How does this play out legally?  Here is the appropriate statute:

RCW 77.15.010
Exemption for department actions.
A person is not guilty of a crime under this chapter if the person is an officer, employee, or agent of the department lawfully acting in the course of his or her authorized duties.
[ 1998 c 190 § 2.]


He isn't an employee and probably not an agent of the department acting in the course of their duties.  If he doesn't fall under that statute, then how would this play out?  Intent.  Do you need intent for Unlawful Big Game Hunting?  Or is it strict liability like a speeding ticket?

RCW 77.15.410
Unlawful hunting of big game—Penalty.
(1) A person is guilty of unlawful hunting of big game in the second degree if the person:
(a) Hunts for, takes, or possesses big game and the person does not have and possess all licenses, tags, or permits required under this title; or
(b) Violates any department rule regarding seasons, bag or possession limits, closed areas including game reserves, closed times, or any other rule governing the hunting, taking, or possession of big game.
(2) A person is guilty of unlawful hunting of big game in the first degree if the person commits the act described in subsection (1) of this section and:
(a) The person hunts for, takes, or possesses three or more big game animals within the same course of events; or
(b) The act occurs within five years of the date of a prior conviction under this title involving unlawful hunting, killing, possessing, or taking big game.
(3)(a) Unlawful hunting of big game in the second degree is a gross misdemeanor. Upon conviction of an offense involving killing or possession of big game taken during a closed season, closed area, without the proper license, tag, or permit using an unlawful method, or in excess of the bag or possession limit, the department shall revoke all of the person's hunting licenses and tags and order a suspension of the person's hunting privileges for two years.
(b) Unlawful hunting of big game in the first degree is a class C felony. Upon conviction, the department shall revoke all of the person's hunting licenses or tags and order the person's hunting privileges suspended for ten years.
(4) For the purposes of this section, "same course of events" means within one twenty-four hour period, or a pattern of conduct composed of a series of acts that are unlawful under subsection (1) of this section, over a period of time evidencing a continuity of purpose.


Intent is not specifically enumerated in the statute.  Is it implied?  What does "takes" mean under subsection (1)(a)?  If I hit this elk on the road have I taken it?  Did I intend to take it?  If I fall a tree on my property and it hits the elk have I "taken" it?  If I put a coyote trap out on my property and it accidentally kills this elk have I hunted or taken it?  Would I be prosecuted for it or not?  Does intent only matter if a prosecutor is looking to charge the case?

Can the attorney get this jury instruction in somehow on this case?

WPIC 10.01 Intent—Intentionally—Definition
A person acts with intent or intentionally when acting with the objective or purpose to accomplish a result that constitutes a crime.


It seems difficult.  Or if not, is the strategy to argue to the jury the WDFW authorized this and it's not the defendant's fault.  It would essentially be a nullification argument and would need to be carefully made by counsel as you are not allowed to argue nullification in WA under our law.  These are the interesting thoughts I have and what I will be looking for.  Or does the nullification get argued with the prosecutor to cut a deal?  Any prosecutor going into this trial would know this is going to be a likely defense and does that sway them from going for the conviction?  Or is the strategy to prolong the case past September when the 2016 raffle tag can be used and then plea to the charge knowing the defendant won't hunt for a few years and will go to Africa or Canada or something?  Time will tell...
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Shawn Ryan on May 20, 2016, 09:58:09 AM
Shawn, since 1(a) is disjunctive, I would not quibble over the definition of "take."  "Hunt" and "possess" are sufficient and much harder for the defendant to state that he did neither. Further, 1(a) and 1(b) are also disjunctive and the violations alleged are what are enumerated in 1(a) and (b).

State v. Stoken seems to hold that "knowing" is the standard and the Court of Appeals had no trouble finding that "knowing" applies to the act of hunting or possessing, not to the defendant's state of mind regarding violating the law.  Further, the Court of Appeals found that "whether [the] hunting season was open"... "is a question of fact."

I've yet to see a legal reason for a deal.  Efficient use of court resources might lead a deal, but maybe not. There might be some court house conversation between the visiting judge, the prosecutor, and J. Chmelewski, who might just have an opinion about the case since she reportedly gave the elk his name while he was living on her land.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on May 20, 2016, 10:22:16 AM
Here's a letter from a Kittitas County resident:

http://www.dailyrecordnews.com/members/letter-as-a-hunter-disgusted-with-killing-of-bullwinkle/article_af72f16e-1e09-11e6-af5a-134c6e038aed.html


Letter: As a hunter, disgusted with killing of Bullwinkle

    Jan Osmonovich 19 hrs ago (1)

To the Editor:

As a county resident and avid elk hunter, I am so outraged and disgusted with all those involved in the shooting of “Bullwinkle” by Mr. Reichert.

This is a man who has used his fortune to buy hunting tags in several states and used his money to pay his way to be able to shoot “trophy” elk yearly. This is the sort of activity that has given hunting such a bad reputation nationwide.

This elk was a local celebrity, in a GMU that did not allow branched antler permits and yet Mr. Reichert not only shot the elk, but had help to move it to the adjoining GMU which was covered by his tag. The fact that this is not his first illegal kill, that he has simply bought his way out of previous charges, and gone on his merry way to purchase new “raffle” tags.

When the raffle system first started in this state, those of us who are law-abiding hunters knew that this would become a rich man’s ticket. The fact that Mr. Reichert has purchased tags year after year and that the WDFW and RMEF condoned this because he added many dollars to their “coffers” is disgusting.

I hope that Mr. Reichert is not able to buy his way out of this situation and that plea bargaining is not an option here in Kittitas County.

I know that the locals who have enjoyed the presence of Bullwinkle for years have to be as sickened as I am with this situation.

The norm for this should apply to Mr. Reichert, seizing his weapons, the pickup he used to transport the elk to the next GMU, and his hunting privileges for life. Harsh? I don’t think so. Justified? You bet.

Unfortunately, he will more than likely get off with a plea bargain and once again, buy his way out. I guess I am hoping that the legal system in Kittitas County will not allow a plea bargain for this repeat offender and hold him legally responsible for his actions and revoke his hunting privileges in this state for life.

Wishful thinking? I hope not. As an ethical hunter and county resident, I hope not.

Jan Osmonovich

Cle Elum


Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Coastal_native on May 20, 2016, 10:42:48 AM
My opinions are general in nature and aren't necessarily a perspective on this particular case.

Organized, commercial poaching rings and repeat offenders should have the heat turned up.  :twocents:  IDK whether that's this case or not.

I'm with you on this one.  I have a hard putting the alleged offense in the same category as those that I feel deserve the harshest penalties.  If this had been any other over the counter tag purchased by a blue collared person and the same offenses were being alleged, I don't think we'd even know about it.  He's rich and the elk was a local celebrity...seems to be driving it.  With as many hunters as we talk about (and witness) testing limits and breaking the game laws (antler restrictions, legal boundaries, legal hunting hours, legal hunting equipment, etc...), I'm having a hard time not putting this in the same category as someone who shoots an illegal animal and tries to convince himself and everyone else that it was "borderline" legal from his perspective.  Although, I probably won't be surprised either way. 

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 20, 2016, 11:18:59 AM
"In December 2007, Reichert killed a trophy elk in the Umatilla National Forest with Wick's assistance outside the area the Forest Service had authorized Wick to provide outfitter-guiding services."

"Reichert hired Wick, who operated an outfitter-guiding service known as Outback Outfitters, to provide outfitter-guiding services for the hunt."

"Reichert also hired a helicopter service that Wick used to spot elk in aide of the hunt, which is unlawful in Washington State."

"Reichert later falsely claimed that Wick had provided no professional services during the hunt or been paid any money for his services."

http://www.spokesman.com/blogs/outdoors/2012/jul/23/trophy-elk-hunter-tagged-lying-hiring-helicopter/

"According to Micheal C. Ormsby, U.S. Attorney for Eastern District of Washington, Reichert bought the 2007 Eastside any-elk Governor’s Auction Tag for around $47,000.  He hired Wick to provide guide services for his hunt, and apparently just to make sure, also hired a helicopter to spot animals — illegal in Washington."

 

Here is the Reichert side of the story as published in his hometown paper:

A headline and story published on July 21, 2012, incorrectly suggested that Salkum resident Tod Reichert pleaded guilty to illegal hunting activity in connection with a 2007 hunt in the Umatilla National Forest. In fact, Reichert’s plea deal only involved him admitting to providing information that ended up being false during a law enforcement investigation of a commercial guiding service. At the time Reichert made the first statement in question, he believed it was true, and the other statement was made in sarcastic frustration with the manner in which he was being questioned by federal officers, according to his Spokane attorney, Steve Hormel. Reichert did not admit to illegal hunting, and all federal charges related to accusations of illegal hunting activities were dropped. Reichert harvested the bull elk legally in December 2007. Reichert and his guide used a helicopter to track the elk the day before the hunt; prosecutors’ claims that this was illegal were dropped. Hunting regulations on the issue are ambiguous, Reichert said. He notes that the state hunting guide that year included an advertisement for an aerial scouting service, further reinforcing his belief that he was acting legally. “I sincerely believed I could hire a helicopter because of the way the regulations were written in the official hunting rules,” Reichert said in a statement provided by his attorney. “I have always worked to hunt legally. I have a great respect for the animals and the law.”

http://www.chronline.com/records/corrections-hunting-in-umatilla-national-forest-death-notice-misspelling/article_e9372910-8b36-11e2-a800-0019bb2963f4.html

OK, so Mr Reichert hired Wick, and Mr Reichert hired a helicopter service AND Wick used the helicopter service to spot elk in aid of the hunt and then Reichert later falsely claimed that Wick had provided no professional services during the hunt or been paid any money for his services.

But... Mr Reichert sincerely believed he could hire a helicopter because of the way the regulations were written in the official hunting rules....

Really???

 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on May 20, 2016, 11:24:24 AM
I believe that he could have thought the helicopter was legal.  I do remember the ad in the regulations for hiring a helicopter.  I'd even given it some thought (not serious thought, but a little thought) about using a helicopter to access some land for elk hunting. :twocents:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 20, 2016, 11:27:48 AM
I believe that he could have thought the helicopter was legal.  I do remember the ad in the regulations for hiring a helicopter.  I'd even given it some thought (not serious thought, but a little thought) about using a helicopter to access some land for elk hunting. :twocents:

There are also ads for four wheelers in the Game Regs, does that introduce any confusion regarding the legality of operating them on Green Dot roads? 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 20, 2016, 11:31:46 AM
Th quote Scooby Doo:  Ruht Roh!

http://www.nbcrightnow.com/story/32020046/photos-bullwinkle-the-ellensburg-elk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on May 20, 2016, 11:32:20 AM
I believe that he could have thought the helicopter was legal.  I do remember the ad in the regulations for hiring a helicopter.  I'd even given it some thought (not serious thought, but a little thought) about using a helicopter to access some land for elk hunting. :twocents:

There are also ads for four wheelers in the Game Regs, does that introduce any confusion regarding the legality of operating them on Green Dot roads?

No.  But I think the green dot road rules were/are very clear.  I didn't get the impression that the flying rules were that clear (or easy to find).  :dunno:  I just think it is possible to give the guy the benefit of the doubt in the helicopter deal.

The bullwinkle case, I still can't understand why he would even want to shoot a tame elk (and in a closed unit).  Why even ask for permission to shoot him when it was obviously illegal?   :dunno:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bango skank on May 20, 2016, 11:36:05 AM
I believe that he could have thought the helicopter was legal.  I do remember the ad in the regulations for hiring a helicopter.  I'd even given it some thought (not serious thought, but a little thought) about using a helicopter to access some land for elk hunting. :twocents:

There are also ads for four wheelers in the Game Regs, does that introduce any confusion regarding the legality of operating them on Green Dot roads?

No.  But I think the green dot road rules were/are very clear.  I didn't get the impression that the flying rules were that clear (or easy to find).  :dunno:  I just think it is possible to give the guy the benefit of the doubt in the helicopter deal.

The bullwinkle case, I still can't understand why he would even want to shoot a tame elk (and in a closed unit).  Why even ask for permission to shoot him when it was obviously illegal?   :dunno:

This guy has a history of claiming not to understand rules that are pretty universally understood by others.  If hes as dumb as he tries to act, why not show the regs to his lawyer and consult him before the fact?  Probably because he knows damn good and well what the answer will be.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on May 20, 2016, 11:38:02 AM
So, he plead guilty and was convicted of lying? And not poaching or wildlife related offense for the 2007 offense?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: turbo on May 20, 2016, 11:38:15 AM
Are we all getting sued now? "IF" this is all true.... What a loser hunter. Disgusting!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 20, 2016, 11:41:03 AM
I believe that he could have thought the helicopter was legal.  I do remember the ad in the regulations for hiring a helicopter.  I'd even given it some thought (not serious thought, but a little thought) about using a helicopter to access some land for elk hunting. :twocents:

There are also ads for four wheelers in the Game Regs, does that introduce any confusion regarding the legality of operating them on Green Dot roads?

No.  But I think the green dot road rules were/are very clear.  I didn't get the impression that the flying rules were that clear (or easy to find).  :dunno:  I just think it is possible to give the guy the benefit of the doubt in the helicopter deal.

The bullwinkle case, I still can't understand why he would even want to shoot a tame elk (and in a closed unit).  Why even ask for permission to shoot him when it was obviously illegal?   :dunno:

My buddy has an airplane we could have been flying out to the islands and hunting blacktails after work for decades and not have to pay the ferry fare.  The chances of spotting a trophy blacktail are pretty slim.  But the law was absolutely unambiguous to us.  But I do get your point.  I actually did give the benefit of the doubt re: Was Reichert aware of what Wick was doing w/the the helicopter? ... until this came up. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 20, 2016, 11:42:01 AM
So, he plead guilty and was convicted of lying? And not poaching or wildlife related offense for the 2007 offense?

Yes. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on May 20, 2016, 11:52:16 AM
Here's a "What If"........

What if a guy had an "any bull" permit for a neighboring GMU and he calls wdfw and asks "Hey, I have a "any bull" permit for GMU 328 but I see a real nice bull in GMU 334.  Can I go ahead and shoot that bull instead of finding one in 328?

I would hope the answer would be "no".......or a laugh followed by "hell no!".

But what if that same guy calls up and says "I have an 'any bull' permit and I see a bull in a firearm restricted area, can I go ahead and shoot him with my muzzleloader?" 

Well, then I could see the wdfw employee saying sure "a muzzleloader is allowed in a firearm restricted area".  The employee might not ask or connect the dots that the firearm restricted area is in the wrong GMU.

Could it have been an honest mistake?  :dunno:  I don't know.  Maybe.  Could the phone call to WDFW have been purposely stated to be misleading into getting permission?  I don't know........maybe.

The case is definitely interesting though.........and no jealousy at all here.   :hello:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: M_ray on May 20, 2016, 11:53:35 AM
Are we all getting sued now?

Yes kiticaashunter cleared this up for us  :rolleyes:


DISCLAIMER: The opinions expressed here are not those of HW Management, Admins, Mods or myself... But they are the opinions of Elvis who has revealed them to me through the medium of my pet hamster, Lee Harvey Oswald...
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on May 20, 2016, 11:53:59 AM
It will be interesting to find out (hopefully we will) what was asked of the wdfw employee and what his answer was.  :twocents:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 2MANY on May 20, 2016, 12:01:46 PM
From what I can see the temporary insanity defense might be appropriate in some cases.

It would appear some go crazy when they see hot women or ponder the thought of wrapping their hands around large bone.
They just cannot control themselves.

When the brain cannot control the bodies actions one could be termed........Temporarily Insane.

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: teanawayslayer on May 20, 2016, 12:07:57 PM
Here's a "What If"........

What if a guy had an "any bull" permit for a neighboring GMU and he calls wdfw and asks "Hey, I have a "any bull" permit for GMU 328 but I see a real nice bull in GMU 334.  Can I go ahead and shoot that bull instead of finding one in 328?

I would hope the answer would be "no".......or a laugh followed by "hell no!".

But what if that same guy calls up and says "I have an 'any bull' permit and I see a bull in a firearm restricted area, can I go ahead and shoot him with my muzzleloader?" 

Well, then I could see the wdfw employee saying sure "a muzzleloader is allowed in a firearm restricted area".  The employee might not ask or connect the dots that the firearm restricted area is in the wrong GMU.

Could it have been an honest mistake?  :dunno:  I don't know.  Maybe.  Could the phone call to WDFW have been purposely stated to be misleading into getting permission?  I don't know........maybe.

The case is definitely interesting though.........and no jealousy at all here.   :hello:
hypothetically there might have been several phone calls. Hypothetically many no's. Hypothetically many baiting questions to get a twisted answer  that someone wanted to hear. I don't know but I had a damage permit for my son. The land owner gave me the permit they recieved from the game department. Stating what unit and what weapon could be used. IT WAS IN WRITING! If it were me with the raffle tag and that was the bull I wanted I would have drove to Yakima to mr grant and had in writing that it was ok to shoot the bull. But that's just me.   :dunno:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: M_ray on May 20, 2016, 12:14:44 PM
Here's a "What If"........

What if a guy had an "any bull" permit for a neighboring GMU and he calls wdfw and asks "Hey, I have a "any bull" permit for GMU 328 but I see a real nice bull in GMU 334.  Can I go ahead and shoot that bull instead of finding one in 328?

I would hope the answer would be "no".......or a laugh followed by "hell no!".

But what if that same guy calls up and says "I have an 'any bull' permit and I see a bull in a firearm restricted area, can I go ahead and shoot him with my muzzleloader?" 

Well, then I could see the wdfw employee saying sure "a muzzleloader is allowed in a firearm restricted area".  The employee might not ask or connect the dots that the firearm restricted area is in the wrong GMU.

Could it have been an honest mistake?  :dunno:  I don't know.  Maybe.  Could the phone call to WDFW have been purposely stated to be misleading into getting permission?  I don't know........maybe.

The case is definitely interesting though.........and no jealousy at all here.   :hello:

More than likely you second scenario is right  :twocents: Allegedly  :twocents:...

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on May 20, 2016, 12:15:36 PM
Hypothetically.........that is funny. :chuckle:

 :)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on May 20, 2016, 12:20:31 PM
I believe that he could have thought the helicopter was legal.  I do remember the ad in the regulations for hiring a helicopter.  I'd even given it some thought (not serious thought, but a little thought) about using a helicopter to access some land for elk hunting. :twocents:

There are also ads for four wheelers in the Game Regs, does that introduce any confusion regarding the legality of operating them on Green Dot roads?

No.  But I think the green dot road rules were/are very clear.  I didn't get the impression that the flying rules were that clear (or easy to find).  :dunno:  I just think it is possible to give the guy the benefit of the doubt in the helicopter deal.

The bullwinkle case, I still can't understand why he would even want to shoot a tame elk (and in a closed unit).  Why even ask for permission to shoot him when it was obviously illegal?   :dunno:

 If I'm the judge, or on the jury, I believe the previous case clearly establishes a pattern of Tod Reichert not only completely understanding the rules laid out in the regs, he recognized the potential conflicts/grey areas, and laboriously looked for ways to subvert them.

 Take the helicopter conviction first, he knew full well that he himself could not fly and hunt so he sent someone else up, clearly in a conscious effort to get around the law.

 This case looks to have much the same effort put into finding some way, any way to be able to kill this bull and get away with it, right down to setting up a excuse to fall back on. I believe Popeshawnpaul and his colleagues may refer to this as premeditation! :twocents:

 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: coachcw on May 20, 2016, 12:42:34 PM
My assumption is the fellas who possibly took the brown bags and helped out knew the rules since they live there  and are hunters . hypothetically speaking of course .
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on May 20, 2016, 12:52:15 PM
So, he plead guilty and was convicted of lying? And not poaching or wildlife related offense for the 2007 offense?

Yes.

Not that I have experience as a judge but I see this not affecting the current case as much. He plead out for 2007 for lying. Sure there were other incidents involved but that's not what he was convicted of. There's no legal pattern of behavior for wildlife convictions so it presents itself as this being the first offense and he'll probably drag this out and fill this year's tags then plead out and get a slap on the wrist.

Just saying, not agreeing
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 20, 2016, 12:52:30 PM
It looks like NBC et all are not too much worried about being sued for defamation by libel. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Woodchuck on May 20, 2016, 12:57:22 PM
So, he plead guilty and was convicted of lying? And not poaching or wildlife related offense for the 2007 offense?

Yes.

Not that I have experience as a judge but I see this not affecting the current case as much. He plead out for 2007 for lying. Sure there were other incidents involved but that's not what he was convicted of. There's no legal pattern of behavior for wildlife convictions so it presents itself as this being the first offense and he'll probably drag this out and fill this year's tags then plead out and get a slap on the wrist.

Just saying, not agreeing
Just where do you get off making logical statements like that? Allegedly... There is no room for that sort of thing around here. Allegedly...
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 20, 2016, 01:26:01 PM
Teen mistakenly kills Idaho grizzly; famed elk shot in Washington

http://www.idahostatesman.com/outdoors/playing-outdoors/article78719782.html
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on May 20, 2016, 02:49:15 PM
I think my cd player is scratched because same things keep playing over and over.  :chuckle:  wait, since it's being called a "pet" does that mean he shot a nuisance pet that trespassed on someone else's property? I mean, the argument is sound, all the news articles and even on here its been clearly argued that this was a "pet" for a decade?  :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on May 20, 2016, 03:29:14 PM
I think my cd player is scratched because same things keep playing over and over.  wait, since it's being called a "pet" does that mean he shot a nuisance pet that trespassed on someone else's property? I mean, the argument is sound, all the news articles and even on here its been clearly argued that this was a "pet" for a decade?

 Let's not spin things Plat, nobody has argued, in any of the threads, that trespassing was involved. It has been made clear that he paid a trespass fee to the landowner, and I believe you know that.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Skillet on May 20, 2016, 03:37:01 PM
I think Plat meant the pet trespassed onto someone else's property and got shot because of it.

I'm not liking the whole "this guy shot a famous elk in a field and that's what we're mad about" vibe in these articles.  The fact remains you can shoot the friendliest, cutest, nicest most photogenic elk around, provided it is in an open unit. 

Let's not confuse the attempt by the media to get clicks by pulling on the heartstrings of bunny huggers with the real issue here - that the accused is charged with killing a branch bull closed to all branched bull hunting.

 :twocents:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on May 20, 2016, 03:40:46 PM
I think Plat meant the pet trespassed onto someone else's property and got shot because of it.

I'm not liking the whole "this guy shot a famous elk in a field and that's what we're mad about" vibe in these articles.  The fact remains you can shoot the friendliest, cutest, nicest most photogenic elk around, provided it is in an open unit. 

Let's not confuse the attempt by the media to get clicks by pulling on the heartstrings of bunny huggers with the real issue here - that the accused is charged with killing a branch bull closed to all branched bull hunting.

 :twocents:

 Got it, at first it sounded like he was interjecting trespass into it, I see where he is going now.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Branden on May 20, 2016, 03:46:00 PM
I'm not going to comment on the legalities of it because I was not there nor the one that got supposed permission to hunt that area.

I do have a problem though with the part about how it's bad to shoot an animal in a field. Zero difference then shooting a cat out of a tree. Neither one takes any skill yet 99% of the people on this site would jump at the chance to shoot a lion in a tree. The first thread on this issue was started because guys were saying it wasn't much of a hunt. Not that it was illegal. Then that started after a page or two.

So for the guys that are saying it's not hunting get off your high horse.
You do a lot of hound hunting Brandon??

oooo you beat me to it!

he likely has never cougar hunted....

I've been lucky enough to do many different hunts, including hunts in several other countries, cougar hunting is still my favorite hunt. Some of the best cougar hunts have ended by taking photos and leaving the cat in the tree! The most rewarding part is watching the young hounds learn and develop into experienced lion hounds. Almost anyone can become successful in many types of hunting, but to be a top notch hound hunter requires incredible dedication by the hunter and a very sharp learning curve. After all the time and work to get good at hound hunting, you can take your dogs to field, search for days and sometimes weeks to find a good track, you and your dogs can experience the thrill of the hunt, hopefully you catch the cat and get photos of the hunted, and then you leave the hunted animal unharmed in the wild after experiencing the hunt of lifetime. Hunting really can't get any better than that!

For those that choose to notch a cougar tag you then have some of the best meat in the woods!

I've actually shot 4 lions in Washington. All without hounds. So yes I've hunted cats before.

Let's say I was rich like some hunters are and a cat is on my bucket list. I hire the best outfitter I can find. Wait by the phone for a call once they get good snow in the area I'm hunting.

Fly in, ride out with an outfitter and cut tracks right away. Get lucky and the cat is treed after a few minutes cause it had a kill next to the road. Hike the 200 yards off the road and shoot it out of the tree. Get my trophy pictures of me with my cat.

Yes not all cat hunts are like that. But some are that easy. And some are way more physical. But at the end of the day most of the cats that get killed take absolutely zero skill from the guys doing the shooting. They pay money to a guy that trains dogs to tree animals. They follow the dogs and shoot an animal out of a tree. Absolutely zero skill on the shooters part. So you have a very good dog trainer, and a guy that pays money to shoot an animal out of a tree, and the actually hunters are the dogs.

How about a guided whitetail hunt with bait? You pay the money, ride out to the blind on the ATV. Wait for the feeder to kick on. Once it does here come the deer and bam you just killed a trophy whitetail. Again zero skill involved. Zero effort involved.

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bobcat on May 20, 2016, 05:53:50 PM
I think it's somewhat legitimate to call this elk a pet and to have a problem with the taking of this elk because of how tame it was. The reason it was this way is because it never lived in a GMU that was open to branch antler elk hunting. This was the only reason this bull survived to the age that he did. Nobody else killed him because it had always been illegal to do so. Until Tod Reichert came along.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: teanawayslayer on May 20, 2016, 06:07:36 PM
I think it's somewhat legitimate to call this elk a pet and to have a problem with the taking of this elk because of how tame it was. The reason it was this way is because it never lived in a GMU that was open to branch antler elk hunting. This was the only reason this bull survived to the age that he did. Nobody else killed him because it had always been illegal to do so. Until Tod Reichert came along.
one of the bulls that hung out with bullwinkle was tranquilized this winter and was relocate to Joe watt feed lot. When the bull came to it walked out of the trailer looked at all the elk ran all the way to east side before breaking through the fence. He found his way home within less than a week. Hmmm tame?  :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on May 20, 2016, 07:12:20 PM
That's the problem nowadays. People turning wild animals into pets. Did it not say they were feeding it and petting it? That sounds like a pet to me. Heck, my argument would be as the homeowner I contacted the State to get its "pet" off my property because it's ruining and damaging my property and interfering with my livestock if not, I'll take care of it myself.

Or, it threatened and intimidated my wife and/or kids when we went outside so I put it down.  If somebodies pet harasses or comes onto my grandmother's pasture and begins to harass her cattle it get a dirt nap and bath in the canal.

Is there a reason they were trying to remove elk? Was there more than one elk involved in relocation? Were there any plans to lethally remove them?

 8)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on May 20, 2016, 07:14:02 PM
Why can't the bunny huggers name and tame wolves..... :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on May 20, 2016, 07:16:24 PM
Isn't there a law against keeping wild animals as pets?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on May 20, 2016, 07:21:58 PM
I wonder how popular the land owner that gave Tod R permission is with the locals that enjoyed watching Bullwinkle? 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: dreamunelk on May 20, 2016, 07:42:51 PM
I wonder how popular the land owner that gave Tod R permission is with the locals that enjoyed watching Bullwinkle?

I wonder how much Mr. R. paid the landowner.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: ridgefire on May 20, 2016, 08:21:13 PM
I wonder how some people consider this hunting and try to justify it. Hopefully he cant buy his way out of this one.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 20, 2016, 10:00:21 PM
That's the problem nowadays. People turning wild animals into pets. Did it not say they were feeding it and petting it? That sounds like a pet to me. Heck, my argument would be as the homeowner I contacted the State to get its "pet" off my property because it's ruining and damaging my property and interfering with my livestock if not, I'll take care of it myself.

Or, it threatened and intimidated my wife and/or kids when we went outside so I put it down.  If somebodies pet harasses or comes onto my grandmother's pasture and begins to harass her cattle it get a dirt nap and bath in the canal.

Is there a reason they were trying to remove elk? Was there more than one elk involved in relocation? Were there any plans to lethally remove them?

 8)

The story would have NEVER gained traction if that were the case. 

Whatever gave anyone the notion that this was going to end well totally escapes me. 

OK, I have held my cards close to the vest, but this particular bull was just hanging out.  Not causing anybody any heartburn.  He was "just there." 

He hung with about five other mature bulls, but other than they were uber visible, he wasn't any different than any other bull that would go away once hunting season started IF he were in a legal GMU.  So, he is what my rancher cousin says are the "bums" he supports while making a living growing alfalfa to feed next winter. 

But "Bullwinkle,"  and his brothers, "were not causing enough of a problem" to be liquidated.  In fact, they provided enough entertainment that those who paid the 'bull elk band tax" willingly did so.  If one person objected and wanted lethal steps taken, what matters is that there was no controlling legal authority to implement lethal removal.     
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on May 20, 2016, 10:37:04 PM
Jd, I think you've done a good job presenting the issues. I just added some additional ideas as I was getting tired of hearing the same argument over and over and over and over and over and over. :chuckle: the same argument that spanned 3 different threads and what, 70 pages total?

Thought I'd present fresh new ideas to stir the pot and rattle the masses :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on May 20, 2016, 11:17:12 PM
Wow alot more keeps piling on since I looked at this site. Like I said I got on here to clear things up. I guess that didn't happen at all. The hunter seems to be judged worse and many of you discredited me. Do what you need to do.

The true fact is at the time the only question in anobodys  mind  was could a rifle be used, or did it need to be a muzzleloader. So they did what we were tought 30 years ago in the fire arms safety course and called and asked the question. Mr. Grant said that it could not be killed with a rifle in that unit. Then was asked if it could because the hunter was disabled.  He said he would figure it out. 16 minutes later (documented) he called back and told them they shouldn't use a rifle and muzzleloader was fine. That shows Grant knew the exact unit this was in.

I have been hunting for more than 3 decades. I miss the times when things didn't seem to change so much. I appaud the people on here that seem to know every rule all the time as thinges change. We all try to keep up on everything.  But are not afraid to call and ask for clarification when needed. In this case WDFG didn't just say it was ok, they went and double checked and again gave the ok.
This was a high profile tag, nobody involved wanted any issues in this case.

Worst part on this forum is the hunter has had some very bad things said about him. He is one of the most generous good people alive. And has done more for the elk than 95% of the hunters in this state combined. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on May 20, 2016, 11:20:37 PM
He is one of the most generous good people alive. And has done more for the elk than 95% of the hunters in this state combined.

 What more has he done than the bidder $1000 behind his bid wouldn't have done?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Colville on May 20, 2016, 11:30:51 PM
I can afford paid hunts. I'd never in a million years pay for a tag, then pay to access a block of alfalfa to shoot a popular and habituated animal. Its pathetic.  Even if compmetely legal, its beneath any sportsman who "does more" for elk than most.

What a crying blanking shame, regardless of the law. Id sooner never hunt again as share a camp with someone who felt that was honorable and is willing to hang their name on it. Or anyone else who would look away to keep in his good graces.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on May 20, 2016, 11:52:29 PM
 How about backing up your statement and answering the question kiti, my guess is you have nothing to back it up. ;)

 Better be careful of making false statements of Tod Riechert, you may get sued. :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on May 20, 2016, 11:56:43 PM
I think it's somewhat legitimate to call this elk a pet and to have a problem with the taking of this elk because of how tame it was. The reason it was this way is because it never lived in a GMU that was open to branch antler elk hunting. This was the only reason this bull survived to the age that he did. Nobody else killed him because it had always been illegal to do so. Until Tod Reichert came along.
one of the bulls that hung out with bullwinkle was tranquilized this winter and was relocate to Joe watt feed lot. When the bull came to it walked out of the trailer looked at all the elk ran all the way to east side before breaking through the fence. He found his way home within less than a week. Hmmm tame?  :chuckle:

Actually that's not the true story.  That poor bull had a tough ending. He ended up getting drug by his horns in yet another mistake by our game department and died. He had a less dignified death than the one you guys killed in the yard last season. Both cases were pretty sad.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on May 21, 2016, 12:00:13 AM
He is one of the most generous good people alive. And has done more for the elk than 95% of the hunters in this state combined.

 What more has he done than the bidder $1000 behind his bid wouldn't have done?

Well if you paid any attention,  I believe it was last year he bid up his own bI'd by another 5k when it was clear there was not another bid coming in.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on May 21, 2016, 12:02:27 AM
Wdfw could've saved time, money and resources and just called me and I would've came out and dropped those bulls for free. :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on May 21, 2016, 12:04:03 AM
He is one of the most generous good people alive. And has done more for the elk than 95% of the hunters in this state combined.

 What more has he done than the bidder $1000 behind his bid wouldn't have done?

Well if you paid any attention,  I believe it was last year he bid up his own bI'd by another 5k when it was clear there was not another bid coming in.

 Wow, I stand corrected, his $5k is indeed more for elk than 95% of the rest of the hunters in this state have done combined. :chuckle:  :mor:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on May 21, 2016, 12:12:15 AM
Wdfw could've saved time, money and resources and just called me and I would've came out and dropped those bulls for free. :chuckle:

Not funny. Sure you have gotten more than your fair share.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: winshooter88 on May 21, 2016, 12:21:49 AM
kiticaashunter,

What you said the question was only means that the game enforcement officer said that in a firearms restricted unit even a disabled hunter could not use a rifle and would have to use a muzzleloader, since we don't know which unit he was told it was in, that does nothing to prove that he knew what unit the elk was located in. Also I was always told that ignorance of the law was no excuse.

Partial quote from kitticaashunter's previous post.
"The true fact is at the time the only question in anobodys  mind  was could a rifle be used, or did it need to be a muzzleloader. So they did what we were tought 30 years ago in the fire arms safety course and called and asked the question. Mr. Grant said that it could not be killed with a rifle in that unit. Then was asked if it could because the hunter was disabled.  He said he would figure it out. 16 minutes later (documented) he called back and told them they shouldn't use a rifle and muzzleloader was fine. That shows Grant knew the exact unit this was in."

[/quote]
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jmscon on May 21, 2016, 12:32:32 AM
Depending on the date when this "hunt" occurred, there is a antlerless hunt in that unit mid November until mid December. You could the WDFW office and say: I'm elk hunting and I'm not sure if I can hunt with a mod rifle or not, can you help me out? Response: Where are you? I'll check and call you back. Ring: You can hunt there but it's a firearms restricted area, so shotgun, muzzle loader or bow. Response: Thanks!

Thing is the other elk that was shot in a "yard" was legal. This elk was not, ever! Oh yea, it was shot in a yard too!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on May 21, 2016, 12:33:40 AM
He is one of the most generous good people alive. And has done more for the elk than 95% of the hunters in this state combined.

 What more has he done than the bidder $1000 behind his bid wouldn't have done?

Well if you paid any attention,  I believe it was last year he bid up his own bI'd by another 5k when it was clear there was not another bid coming in.

 Wow, I stand corrected, his $5k is indeed more for elk than 95% of the rest of the hunters in this state have done combined. :chuckle:  :mor:

Guess the moron sign was pointed to me. That's fine All I was trying to do here is tell the honest side of the story of a good man that has put hundreds of thousands of dollars into it in the last few years.

The situation last season was unfortunate.  The honest truth is nobody involved in the situation tried to get around anything or cheat any rules. They checked,  and Grant double checked to make sure it was all on the up and up.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on May 21, 2016, 12:48:21 AM
kiticaashunter,

What you said the question was only means that the game enforcement officer said that in a firearms restricted unit even a disabled hunter could not use a rifle and would have to use a muzzleloader, since we don't know which unit he was told it was in, that does nothing to prove that he knew what unit the elk was located in. Also I was always told that ignorance of the law was no excuse.

Partial quote from kitticaashunter's previous post.
"The true fact is at the time the only question in anobodys  mind  was could a rifle be used, or did it need to be a muzzleloader. So they did what we were tought 30 years ago in the fire arms safety course and called and asked the question. Mr. Grant said that it could not be killed with a rifle in that unit. Then was asked if it could because the hunter was disabled.  He said he would figure it out. 16 minutes later (documented) he called back and told them they shouldn't use a rifle and muzzleloader was fine. That shows Grant knew the exact unit this was in."

[/quote]

Sorry if I wasn't clear on that. Unit next door would have been fine with any weapon. Mr. Grant knew exactly what unit and in fact what peice of property that bull was on when he told them they couldn't use the rifle and needed to use a muzzleloader.

I know you didn't say this but there has been a lot of mention of why the bull was moved to be field dressed. It wasn't some big cover up. The land owner requested a gut pile was not left there. Personally I would think that would be a big part of the story. Last I heard nobody even the people with the newspaper articles ever asked the land owner if that was the case. Instead they print on the words of people that live on the other side of the state, and a couple anti hunters.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on May 21, 2016, 12:58:57 AM
Depending on the date when this "hunt" occurred, there is a antlerless hunt in that unit mid November until mid December. You could the WDFW office and say: I'm elk hunting and I'm not sure if I can hunt with a mod rifle or not, can you help me out? Response: Where are you? I'll check and call you back. Ring: You can hunt there but it's a firearms restricted area, so shotgun, muzzle loader or bow. Response: Thanks!

Thing is the other elk that was shot in a "yard" was legal. This elk was not, ever! Oh yea, it was shot in a yard too!

Mr. Grant knew the exact bull that was was going to be taken. There was no trickery or word's twisted  in this case. At the time he gave gave the good to go he was up for promotion. Since then he has gotten it and tried hard to distance himself from this. He is an honest guy and will tell the truth on the stand. And that will be that he double checked to make sure it was all good.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: ridgefire on May 21, 2016, 03:16:02 AM
How and why can you try to justify the taking of this elk when it was obviously taken in a closed unit Mr kiticaashunter? Just curious, but since you seem to know all the facts about the hunt what unit was the bull shot in and was it open to any bull with that tag?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bearpaw on May 21, 2016, 06:00:51 AM
Depending on the date when this "hunt" occurred, there is a antlerless hunt in that unit mid November until mid December. You could the WDFW office and say: I'm elk hunting and I'm not sure if I can hunt with a mod rifle or not, can you help me out? Response: Where are you? I'll check and call you back. Ring: You can hunt there but it's a firearms restricted area, so shotgun, muzzle loader or bow. Response: Thanks!

Thing is the other elk that was shot in a "yard" was legal. This elk was not, ever! Oh yea, it was shot in a yard too!

Mr. Grant knew the exact bull that was was going to be taken. There was no trickery or word's twisted  in this case. At the time he gave gave the good to go he was up for promotion. Since then he has gotten it and tried hard to distance himself from this. He is an honest guy and will tell the truth on the stand. And that will be that he double checked to make sure it was all good.

Thank you for your many responses, it good to hear the other side of the story. I understand that many hunters would not want to hunt this animal because they view it as not being a challenging hunt and many view it as unethical to shoot an animal that thinks it's safe in an alfalfa field where it never gets shot at. In reality this animal had probably been legal game in this unit at a previous time in it's life. No doubt since maturing into an outstanding animal there have been dozens if not hundreds of hunters who tried to figure out how they could hunt this animal. In the meantime the animal became more complacent as it was not hunted and was even fed by local residents. It appears many local people adopted the bull as their mascot so to speak.

While many hunters condemn Reichert for shooting this animal it sounds like Reichert did the right thing and asked WDFW how to legally hunt the animal. I have pointed out that if a person calls WDFW with a question and is told you can hunt that seems to me all that is needed. I don't see how Reichert can be found guilty if he was told by WDFW after they researched the issue, that he can shoot the animal with his muzzleloader instead of his rifle and that is what he did.

I feel a person is innocent until proven guilty, I find it unfortunate that hunters are so quick to throw other hunters under the bus before they know the facts. I find it unfortunate that hunters turn on each other because they think one way of hunting is more ethical than another. I also find it unfortunate that a hunter needs a crystal ball to know if what they were told they could do by the enforcing agency will result in such a public outcry.

I'm sure someone will try to chastise me because I didn't publicly join in this witch hunt and I'll probably be accused of being an unethical hunter because I don't join in the outcry because this "mascot" was shot in a farmer's field. But I view it in a neutral "black and white" manner, did the hunter break the law or didn't he break the law. After finally hearing the other side of the story I'm not convinced Reichert broke the law. It sounds like he wanted to find a way to legally take the animal and was told by WDFW how to take the animal and then he proceeded. Sorry, but I question if there was any intent to break the law after hearing the other side of the story.

This whole thing more or less reminds me of "Cecil the Lion", the media will blow this story out of proportion to make hunters look bad because the animal was given a human name and considered by locals to be a pet! Unfortunately hunters are helping this scenario to happen! Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying the locals are at fault or that it was smart to shoot this animal. But if you take the emotion out of this story and simply ask yourself two questions, "Was the hunter told by the regulating agency he can shoot the animal?" and "Did the hunter intend to break the law?" While I understand ignorance of the law is no defense I think it's very questionable if Reichert can be found guilty. I would like to hear what Popeshawnpaul thinks after reading all of this?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 21, 2016, 06:14:20 AM
If the only valid elk tag you were holding clearly sets these parameters:

Elk: Any 300 or 500 series GMU open to elk hunting except GMUs not open to branch antlered bull elk hunting

What were you doing hunting elk in GMU 334 in the first place?  Is there anything anywhere in the Game Regs that even suggest that GMU 334 is open to branch antlered elk hunting.


     
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: NOCK NOCK on May 21, 2016, 06:19:59 AM
These most recent posts,(esp. by kiticaashunter) remind me of the Bill Clinton/Monica deal.  :yike:

Bills statement, "I did not have sexual relations with that women",
 
Technically he was truthful & correct...He absolutely did not............She had sexual relations with him.

I view kiti's postings here as a poor attempt of muddying the waters.  :twocents:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bearpaw on May 21, 2016, 06:20:39 AM
I'm not going to comment on the legalities of it because I was not there nor the one that got supposed permission to hunt that area.

I do have a problem though with the part about how it's bad to shoot an animal in a field. Zero difference then shooting a cat out of a tree. Neither one takes any skill yet 99% of the people on this site would jump at the chance to shoot a lion in a tree. The first thread on this issue was started because guys were saying it wasn't much of a hunt. Not that it was illegal. Then that started after a page or two.

So for the guys that are saying it's not hunting get off your high horse.
You do a lot of hound hunting Brandon??

oooo you beat me to it!

he likely has never cougar hunted....

I've been lucky enough to do many different hunts, including hunts in several other countries, cougar hunting is still my favorite hunt. Some of the best cougar hunts have ended by taking photos and leaving the cat in the tree! The most rewarding part is watching the young hounds learn and develop into experienced lion hounds. Almost anyone can become successful in many types of hunting, but to be a top notch hound hunter requires incredible dedication by the hunter and a very sharp learning curve. After all the time and work to get good at hound hunting, you can take your dogs to field, search for days and sometimes weeks to find a good track, you and your dogs can experience the thrill of the hunt, hopefully you catch the cat and get photos of the hunted, and then you leave the hunted animal unharmed in the wild after experiencing the hunt of lifetime. Hunting really can't get any better than that!

For those that choose to notch a cougar tag you then have some of the best meat in the woods!

I've actually shot 4 lions in Washington. All without hounds. So yes I've hunted cats before.

Let's say I was rich like some hunters are and a cat is on my bucket list. I hire the best outfitter I can find. Wait by the phone for a call once they get good snow in the area I'm hunting.

Fly in, ride out with an outfitter and cut tracks right away. Get lucky and the cat is treed after a few minutes cause it had a kill next to the road. Hike the 200 yards off the road and shoot it out of the tree. Get my trophy pictures of me with my cat.

Yes not all cat hunts are like that. But some are that easy. And some are way more physical. But at the end of the day most of the cats that get killed take absolutely zero skill from the guys doing the shooting. They pay money to a guy that trains dogs to tree animals. They follow the dogs and shoot an animal out of a tree. Absolutely zero skill on the shooters part. So you have a very good dog trainer, and a guy that pays money to shoot an animal out of a tree, and the actually hunters are the dogs.

How about a guided whitetail hunt with bait? You pay the money, ride out to the blind on the ATV. Wait for the feeder to kick on. Once it does here come the deer and bam you just killed a trophy whitetail. Again zero skill involved. Zero effort involved.

I was more or less correct, you have never cougar hunted with hounds. Instead you have conjured up "how you think it's unethical" in your mind.

Hooray, you are a stud hunter, you killed 4 lions without hounds, that must make everyone who wants to hunt with hounds unethical! I bet you even donated to HSUS so they could ban bear baiting and hound hunting. :chuckle:

FYI, you are nobody special, I know lots of hunters who have killed cougar without dogs, hundreds are killed every year in WA without dogs, all you have to do is follow the tracks until you see the cat and shoot it, anyone can do that, it's the easy way out, you didn't go to all the effort training hounds and doing it right. You simply walked out in the woods and shot those cats, pathetic to say the least. maybe you were even just road hunting and blasted one using your truck hood for a rest. Maybe you shot one through your bedroom window out of your back yard. Worse yet, you may have baited one in or you may have really stooped low and shot one of those cats when it came in to finish eating the deer it worked so hard to kill so it could merely survive! How disgusting! :chuckle:

It's obvious to me you are the moral compass of hunters, you know how it should be done, we should all be like you or we should not hunt, we are all pathetic.
-
-
-
-
-
Well I'm very sorry for having to turn the table on you with those disgusting remarks.  :sry:

I just wanted to show you how prejudice and narrow minded you are being. As hunters we should all support each other in all legal pursuits of hunting. It's specifically these narrow minded tactics that continue to cause the erosion of hunting. Please see the phrase in the bottom of this post!

"Americans are systematically advocating, legislating, and voting away each others rights. Support all user groups & quit losing opportunity!"
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: teanawayslayer on May 21, 2016, 06:26:46 AM
Depending on the date when this "hunt" occurred, there is a antlerless hunt in that unit mid November until mid December. You could the WDFW office and say: I'm elk hunting and I'm not sure if I can hunt with a mod rifle or not, can you help me out? Response: Where are you? I'll check and call you back. Ring: You can hunt there but it's a firearms restricted area, so shotgun, muzzle loader or bow. Response: Thanks!

Thing is the other elk that was shot in a "yard" was legal. This elk was not, ever! Oh yea, it was shot in a yard too!

Mr. Grant knew the exact bull that was was going to be taken. There was no trickery or word's twisted  in this case. At the time he gave gave the good to go he was up for promotion. Since then he has gotten it and tried hard to distance himself from this. He is an honest guy and will tell the truth on the stand. And that will be that he double checked to make sure it was all good.
im glad you cleared this issue up for us.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on May 21, 2016, 06:39:08 AM
I still have a question even though most has been cleared up by now.  Didn't wdfw investigate the case and then hand it over to the county, and recommend prosecution? I would have thought that if Mr Grant gave permission, then the case would have been dropped?  Is it simply because Grant had no authority legally to give the OK?

If permission was really given like they say, then I don't see why he would be found guilty....but then I also don't see why he would even be charged if permission were given?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Branden on May 21, 2016, 06:45:19 AM
I'm not going to comment on the legalities of it because I was not there nor the one that got supposed permission to hunt that area.

I do have a problem though with the part about how it's bad to shoot an animal in a field. Zero difference then shooting a cat out of a tree. Neither one takes any skill yet 99% of the people on this site would jump at the chance to shoot a lion in a tree. The first thread on this issue was started because guys were saying it wasn't much of a hunt. Not that it was illegal. Then that started after a page or two.

So for the guys that are saying it's not hunting get off your high horse.
You do a lot of hound hunting Brandon??

oooo you beat me to it!

he likely has never cougar hunted....

I've been lucky enough to do many different hunts, including hunts in several other countries, cougar hunting is still my favorite hunt. Some of the best cougar hunts have ended by taking photos and leaving the cat in the tree! The most rewarding part is watching the young hounds learn and develop into experienced lion hounds. Almost anyone can become successful in many types of hunting, but to be a top notch hound hunter requires incredible dedication by the hunter and a very sharp learning curve. After all the time and work to get good at hound hunting, you can take your dogs to field, search for days and sometimes weeks to find a good track, you and your dogs can experience the thrill of the hunt, hopefully you catch the cat and get photos of the hunted, and then you leave the hunted animal unharmed in the wild after experiencing the hunt of lifetime. Hunting really can't get any better than that!

For those that choose to notch a cougar tag you then have some of the best meat in the woods!

I've actually shot 4 lions in Washington. All without hounds. So yes I've hunted cats before.

Let's say I was rich like some hunters are and a cat is on my bucket list. I hire the best outfitter I can find. Wait by the phone for a call once they get good snow in the area I'm hunting.

Fly in, ride out with an outfitter and cut tracks right away. Get lucky and the cat is treed after a few minutes cause it had a kill next to the road. Hike the 200 yards off the road and shoot it out of the tree. Get my trophy pictures of me with my cat.

Yes not all cat hunts are like that. But some are that easy. And some are way more physical. But at the end of the day most of the cats that get killed take absolutely zero skill from the guys doing the shooting. They pay money to a guy that trains dogs to tree animals. They follow the dogs and shoot an animal out of a tree. Absolutely zero skill on the shooters part. So you have a very good dog trainer, and a guy that pays money to shoot an animal out of a tree, and the actually hunters are the dogs.

How about a guided whitetail hunt with bait? You pay the money, ride out to the blind on the ATV. Wait for the feeder to kick on. Once it does here come the deer and bam you just killed a trophy whitetail. Again zero skill involved. Zero effort involved.

I was more or less correct, you have never cougar hunted with hounds. Instead you have conjured up "how you think it's unethical" in your mind.

Hooray, you are a stud hunter, you killed 4 lions without hounds, that must make everyone who wants to hunt with hounds unethical! I bet you even donated to HSUS so they could ban bear baiting and hound hunting. :chuckle:

FYI, you are nobody special, I know lots of hunters who have killed cougar without dogs, hundreds are killed every year in WA without dogs, all you have to do is follow the tracks until you see the cat and shoot it, anyone can do that, it's the easy way out, you didn't go to all the effort training hounds and doing it right. You simply walked out in the woods and shot those cats, pathetic to say the least. maybe you were even just road hunting and blasted one using your truck hood for a rest. Maybe you shot one through your bedroom window out of your back yard. Worse yet, you may have baited one in or you may have really stooped low and shot one of those cats when it came in to finish eating the deer it worked so hard to kill so it could merely survive! How disgusting! :chuckle:

It's obvious to me you are the moral compass of hunters, you know how it should be done, we should all be like you or we should not hunt, we are all pathetic.
-
-
-
-
-
Well I'm very sorry for having to turn the table on you with those disgusting remarks.  :sry:

I just wanted to show you how prejudice and narrow minded you are being. As hunters we should all support each other in all legal pursuits of hunting. It's specifically these narrow minded tactics that continue to cause the erosion of hunting. Please see the phrase in the bottom of this post!

"Americans are systematically advocating, legislating, and voting away each others rights. Support all user groups & quit losing opportunity!"

I believe you have my position wrong and I don't even care that you tried to insult me. I only tried to point out to the guys saying this elk that was killed wasn't hunted was actually hunted even though it didn't take a lot of effort or skill just like some other hunts. 

There are a ton of what I consider "easy hunts" yet I still call it hunting because unlike what you got from my post I don't care how other people hunt or think my way is above others ways of hunting.

And as for hunting with dogs my opinion will not change. A good guide could easily get my wife who has never hunted before a nice cat with hounds. It doesn't take a skilled hunter to shoot an animal out of a tree. It takes a good dog trainer to train the dogs, and a couple of good dogs.

That doesn't mean I think it should not be allowed. It's the best way to manage cats so it should be legal.

Regards, Branden
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 21, 2016, 07:00:16 AM
I have known that reporters have  a reporter has been takling to and asking questions of local Residents at least one local resident since early this year and I recognized by the nature of the questions that were being asked how the story was being developed. e.g. into another "Cecil" story. 

I keep asking:  What ever gave anyone the notion that this was going to end well? 

Irrespective of whether charges had been filed or not this story was already going to end up in the news.  There were more than a couple local residents who were absolutely outraged about the shooting of this particular elk in the location he was taken and btw these people are not what anyone would recognize as "bunny huggers."

The thing that really ticks me off is that this incident will be exploited in an attempt to shame all hunters even though the fact of the matter is that not one hunter outside of the individuals involved had any responsibility what so ever for deciding to target this animal. 

From the very beginning this was never going to end well.  Stevie Wonder could see that.  Had this bull moved up into Shnebley Canyon and been taken there, people would have cared, but they would not be outraged.

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bearpaw on May 21, 2016, 07:06:46 AM
I'm not going to comment on the legalities of it because I was not there nor the one that got supposed permission to hunt that area.

I do have a problem though with the part about how it's bad to shoot an animal in a field. Zero difference then shooting a cat out of a tree. Neither one takes any skill yet 99% of the people on this site would jump at the chance to shoot a lion in a tree. The first thread on this issue was started because guys were saying it wasn't much of a hunt. Not that it was illegal. Then that started after a page or two.

So for the guys that are saying it's not hunting get off your high horse.
You do a lot of hound hunting Brandon??

oooo you beat me to it!

he likely has never cougar hunted....

I've been lucky enough to do many different hunts, including hunts in several other countries, cougar hunting is still my favorite hunt. Some of the best cougar hunts have ended by taking photos and leaving the cat in the tree! The most rewarding part is watching the young hounds learn and develop into experienced lion hounds. Almost anyone can become successful in many types of hunting, but to be a top notch hound hunter requires incredible dedication by the hunter and a very sharp learning curve. After all the time and work to get good at hound hunting, you can take your dogs to field, search for days and sometimes weeks to find a good track, you and your dogs can experience the thrill of the hunt, hopefully you catch the cat and get photos of the hunted, and then you leave the hunted animal unharmed in the wild after experiencing the hunt of lifetime. Hunting really can't get any better than that!

For those that choose to notch a cougar tag you then have some of the best meat in the woods!

I've actually shot 4 lions in Washington. All without hounds. So yes I've hunted cats before.

Let's say I was rich like some hunters are and a cat is on my bucket list. I hire the best outfitter I can find. Wait by the phone for a call once they get good snow in the area I'm hunting.

Fly in, ride out with an outfitter and cut tracks right away. Get lucky and the cat is treed after a few minutes cause it had a kill next to the road. Hike the 200 yards off the road and shoot it out of the tree. Get my trophy pictures of me with my cat.

Yes not all cat hunts are like that. But some are that easy. And some are way more physical. But at the end of the day most of the cats that get killed take absolutely zero skill from the guys doing the shooting. They pay money to a guy that trains dogs to tree animals. They follow the dogs and shoot an animal out of a tree. Absolutely zero skill on the shooters part. So you have a very good dog trainer, and a guy that pays money to shoot an animal out of a tree, and the actually hunters are the dogs.

How about a guided whitetail hunt with bait? You pay the money, ride out to the blind on the ATV. Wait for the feeder to kick on. Once it does here come the deer and bam you just killed a trophy whitetail. Again zero skill involved. Zero effort involved.

I was more or less correct, you have never cougar hunted with hounds. Instead you have conjured up "how you think it's unethical" in your mind.

Hooray, you are a stud hunter, you killed 4 lions without hounds, that must make everyone who wants to hunt with hounds unethical! I bet you even donated to HSUS so they could ban bear baiting and hound hunting. :chuckle:

FYI, you are nobody special, I know lots of hunters who have killed cougar without dogs, hundreds are killed every year in WA without dogs, all you have to do is follow the tracks until you see the cat and shoot it, anyone can do that, it's the easy way out, you didn't go to all the effort training hounds and doing it right. You simply walked out in the woods and shot those cats, pathetic to say the least. maybe you were even just road hunting and blasted one using your truck hood for a rest. Maybe you shot one through your bedroom window out of your back yard. Worse yet, you may have baited one in or you may have really stooped low and shot one of those cats when it came in to finish eating the deer it worked so hard to kill so it could merely survive! How disgusting! :chuckle:

It's obvious to me you are the moral compass of hunters, you know how it should be done, we should all be like you or we should not hunt, we are all pathetic.
-
-
-
-
-
Well I'm very sorry for having to turn the table on you with those disgusting remarks.  :sry:

I just wanted to show you how prejudice and narrow minded you are being. As hunters we should all support each other in all legal pursuits of hunting. It's specifically these narrow minded tactics that continue to cause the erosion of hunting. Please see the phrase in the bottom of this post!

"Americans are systematically advocating, legislating, and voting away each others rights. Support all user groups & quit losing opportunity!"

I believe you have my position wrong and I don't even care that you tried to insult me. I only tried to point out to the guys saying this elk that was killed wasn't hunted was actually hunted even though it didn't take a lot of effort or skill just like some other hunts. 

There are a ton of what I consider "easy hunts" yet I still call it hunting because unlike what you got from my post I don't care how other people hunt or think my way is above others ways of hunting.

And as for hunting with dogs my opinion will not change. A good guide could easily get my wife who has never hunted before a nice cat with hounds. It doesn't take a skilled hunter to shoot an animal out of a tree. It takes a good dog trainer to train the dogs, and a couple of good dogs.

That doesn't mean I think it should not be allowed. It's the best way to manage cats so it should be legal.

Regards, Branden

It appeared to me that you were putting down hound hunters as being less skilled and anyone else who hunted or might want to hunt with hounds, so I tried to put it in perspective that maybe some people would view just going out and shooting one the easy way without all the effort as the unskilled method of hunting cougar. Those aren't my feelings but I put your comments in perspective, so don't feel insulted!

I think it's bad for the sport for hunters to act as if they are somehow better than other hunters or that their preferred methods are more skilled or ethical than other hunters or their hunting methods. That attitude is our own worst enemy! If I misunderstood your post I certainly apologize, but that was the way it appeared to me.  :dunno:

I agree with you that the elk was hunted, even if it was considered to be an unethical hunt by many other hunters and local residents. I am discouraged by the outrage many hunters exhibited before hearing both sides of the story, that's not how this country was founded, but increasingly how people seem to react!  :twocents:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Branden on May 21, 2016, 07:17:12 AM
Yea no biggie. I don't think I would get much enjoyment about telling the story of how I shot a 190" muley over my hood compared to the 150" buck I backpacked in 10 miles and killed with my bow. But both are hunting.

Some hunts take way more effort and skill then others. But the outrage for this bull started not because it was allegedly poached but because it was an easy hunt and not the way these guys would do it. Same as the article states with the "little girl saying it's not hunting".

Sorry to derail this from the judges and prosecutors we have here on Huntwa. You guys can continue labeling this illegal before this guy gets his chance at a trial.

I always thought it was innocent until proven guilty? The law must have changed and I've been to busy to notice. Thanks for helping educate me judges and prosecutors. :)

Regards, Branden
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: fishngamereaper on May 21, 2016, 07:20:29 AM
Depending on the date when this "hunt" occurred, there is a antlerless hunt in that unit mid November until mid December. You could the WDFW office and say: I'm elk hunting and I'm not sure if I can hunt with a mod rifle or not, can you help me out? Response: Where are you? I'll check and call you back. Ring: You can hunt there but it's a firearms restricted area, so shotgun, muzzle loader or bow. Response: Thanks!

Thing is the other elk that was shot in a "yard" was legal. This elk was not, ever! Oh yea, it was shot in a yard too!

Mr. Grant knew the exact bull that was was going to be taken. There was no trickery or word's twisted  in this case. At the time he gave gave the good to go he was up for promotion. Since then he has gotten it and tried hard to distance himself from this. He is an honest guy and will tell the truth on the stand. And that will be that he double checked to make sure it was all good.

I'm curious are you testifying in the case. Your  giving the impression that you know specific details related to the case, which is interesting because generally open forum web conversation about "facts" of a case are normally not recommended by either side. And I'm sure Grant would not appreciate the nature at which he is being thrown under the bus in regards to his alleged involvement.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Ghost Hunter on May 21, 2016, 07:20:56 AM
Is there going to be any open seats in the courtroom for a casual observer?  Might be fun to go 'live' for the final chapter? :o
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 21, 2016, 07:26:34 AM
Yea no biggie. I don't think I would get much enjoyment about telling the story of how I shot a 190" muley over my hood compared to the 150" buck I backpacked in 10 miles and killed with my bow. But both are hunting.

Some hunts take way more effort and skill then others. But the outrage for this bull started not because it was allegedly poached but because it was an easy hunt and not the way these guys would do it. Same as the article states with the "little girl saying it's not hunting".

Sorry to derail this from the judges and prosecutors we have here on Huntwa. You guys can continue labeling this illegal before this guy gets his chance at a trial.

I always thought it was innocent until proven guilty? The law must have changed and I've been to busy to notice. Thanks for helping educate me judges and prosecutors. :)

Regards, Branden

People who live right at ground zero were absolutely fuming mad about it.  They were not a little upset, they were steaming bloody madder than hell over it.   The individual I know said that if he had wandered "off the reservation" e.g. out of GMU 334 and got killed that they would have missed him, but would have said: well why'd ya' go wandering off to where you would get shot.  Ya big dummy. 

Again, I am not talking about bunny huggers here.  People knew he could wander up north and get plugged any day, but so long as he stayed home shooting him was inexcusable. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bearpaw on May 21, 2016, 07:31:22 AM
Yea no biggie. I don't think I would get much enjoyment about telling the story of how I shot a 190" muley over my hood compared to the 150" buck I backpacked in 10 miles and killed with my bow. But both are hunting.

Some hunts take way more effort and skill then others. But the outrage for this bull started not because it was allegedly poached but because it was an easy hunt and not the way these guys would do it. Same as the article states with the "little girl saying it's not hunting".

Sorry to derail this from the judges and prosecutors we have here on Huntwa. You guys can continue labeling this illegal before this guy gets his chance at a trial.

I always thought it was innocent until proven guilty? The law must have changed and I've been to busy to notice. Thanks for helping educate me judges and prosecutors. :)

Regards, Branden

I see this elk issue the same way!  :dunno:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: mfswallace on May 21, 2016, 07:41:21 AM
Depending on the date when this "hunt" occurred, there is a antlerless hunt in that unit mid November until mid December. You could the WDFW office and say: I'm elk hunting and I'm not sure if I can hunt with a mod rifle or not, can you help me out? Response: Where are you? I'll check and call you back. Ring: You can hunt there but it's a firearms restricted area, so shotgun, muzzle loader or bow. Response: Thanks!

Thing is the other elk that was shot in a "yard" was legal. This elk was not, ever! Oh yea, it was shot in a yard too!

Mr. Grant knew the exact bull that was was going to be taken. There was no trickery or word's twisted  in this case. At the time he gave gave the good to go he was up for promotion. Since then he has gotten it and tried hard to distance himself from this. He is an honest guy and will tell the truth on the stand. And that will be that he double checked to make sure it was all good.

Thank you for your many responses, it good to hear the other side of the story. I understand that many hunters would not want to hunt this animal because they view it as not being a challenging hunt and many view it as unethical to shoot an animal that thinks it's safe in an alfalfa field where it never gets shot at. In reality this animal had probably been legal game in this unit at a previous time in it's life. No doubt since maturing into an outstanding animal there have been dozens if not hundreds of hunters who tried to figure out how they could hunt this animal. In the meantime the animal became more complacent as it was not hunted and was even fed by local residents. It appears many local people adopted the bull as their mascot so to speak.

While many hunters condemn Reichert for shooting this animal it sounds like Reichert did the right thing and asked WDFW how to legally hunt the animal. I have pointed out that if a person calls WDFW with a question and is told you can hunt that seems to me all that is needed. I don't see how Reichert can be found guilty if he was told by WDFW after they researched the issue, that he can shoot the animal with his muzzleloader instead of his rifle and that is what he did.

I feel a person is innocent until proven guilty, I find it unfortunate that hunters are so quick to throw other hunters under the bus before they know the facts. I find it unfortunate that hunters turn on each other because they think one way of hunting is more ethical than another. I also find it unfortunate that a hunter needs a crystal ball to know if what they were told they could do by the enforcing agency will result in such a public outcry.

I'm sure someone will try to chastise me because I didn't publicly join in this witch hunt and I'll probably be accused of being an unethical hunter because I don't join in the outcry because this "mascot" was shot in a farmer's field. But I view it in a neutral "black and white" manner, did the hunter break the law or didn't he break the law. After finally hearing the other side of the story I'm not convinced Reichert broke the law. It sounds like he wanted to find a way to legally take the animal and was told by WDFW how to take the animal and then he proceeded. Sorry, but I question if there was any intent to break the law after hearing the other side of the story.

This whole thing more or less reminds me of "Cecil the Lion", the media will blow this story out of proportion to make hunters look bad because the animal was given a human name and considered by locals to be a pet! Unfortunately hunters are helping this scenario to happen! Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying the locals are at fault or that it was smart to shoot this animal. But if you take the emotion out of this story and simply ask yourself two questions, "Was the hunter told by the regulating agency he can shoot the animal?" and "Did the hunter intend to break the law?" While I understand ignorance of the law is no defense I think it's very questionable if Reichert can be found guilty. I would like to hear what Popeshawnpaul thinks after reading all of this?

Way to protect yourself from a lawsuit :tup: :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Ghost Hunter on May 21, 2016, 07:42:11 AM
 :yike: Sounds like somebody hit a nerve  :dunno:  Not sure how it relates to this thread :dunno:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 21, 2016, 07:42:38 AM
I still have a question even though most has been cleared up by now.  Didn't wdfw investigate the case and then hand it over to the county, and recommend prosecution? I would have thought that if Mr Grant gave permission, then the case would have been dropped?  Is it simply because Grant had no authority legally to give the OK?

If permission was really given like they say, then I don't see why he would be found guilty....but then I also don't see why he would even be charged if permission were given?

WDFW absolutely did not recommended prosecution.  The county did that on thier own knowing  if it did go to court WDFW is not going to be good for thier case. They county got a lot of pressure from the likes of the tax money theif and the front porch elk hunter. This case will be dropped long before it sees a jury.

Prosecutor's don't go fishing for cases.  Law enforcement agencies bring cases to them.  And you better watch the libel buster, I commute by train three hours/day.  I have time to compose my thoughts on my ipad and email them to myself.  Posting them takes two clicks of a mouse and what I do on my break time is my business. 

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on May 21, 2016, 08:01:27 AM
Yea no biggie. I don't think I would get much enjoyment about telling the story of how I shot a 190" muley over my hood compared to the 150" buck I backpacked in 10 miles and killed with my bow. But both are hunting.

Some hunts take way more effort and skill then others. But the outrage for this bull started not because it was allegedly poached but because it was an easy hunt and not the way these guys would do it. Same as the article states with the "little girl saying it's not hunting".

Sorry to derail this from the judges and prosecutors we have here on Huntwa. You guys can continue labeling this illegal before this guy gets his chance at a trial.

I always thought it was innocent until proven guilty? The law must have changed and I've been to busy to notice. Thanks for helping educate me judges and prosecutors. :)

Regards, Branden

People who live right at ground zero were absolutely fuming mad about it.  They were not a little upset, they were steaming bloody madder than hell over it.   The individual I know said that if he had wandered "off the reservation" e.g. out of GMU 334 and got killed that they would have missed him, but would have said: well why'd ya' go wandering off to where you would get shot.  Ya big dummy. 

Again, I am not talking about bunny huggers here.  People knew he could wander up north and get plugged any day, but so long as he stayed home shooting him was inexcusable.

 And one of them was a Kittitas county superior court judge.......The ones that came up with the name.....And Craig Schnebly  ("Schnebly Bull") is no newcomer to the area....  (Schnebly Rd....Schnebly Canyon).
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on May 21, 2016, 08:04:43 AM
Depending on the date when this "hunt" occurred, there is a antlerless hunt in that unit mid November until mid December. You could the WDFW office and say: I'm elk hunting and I'm not sure if I can hunt with a mod rifle or not, can you help me out? Response: Where are you? I'll check and call you back. Ring: You can hunt there but it's a firearms restricted area, so shotgun, muzzle loader or bow. Response: Thanks!

Thing is the other elk that was shot in a "yard" was legal. This elk was not, ever! Oh yea, it was shot in a yard too!

Mr. Grant knew the exact bull that was was going to be taken. There was no trickery or word's twisted  in this case. At the time he gave gave the good to go he was up for promotion. Since then he has gotten it and tried hard to distance himself from this. He is an honest guy and will tell the truth on the stand. And that will be that he double checked to make sure it was all good.

I'm curious are you testifying in the case. Your  giving the impression that you know specific details related to the case, which is interesting because generally open forum web conversation about "facts" of a case are normally not recommended by either side. And I'm sure Grant would not appreciate the nature at which he is being thrown under the bus in regards to his alleged involvement.

At this point I have not been asked to testify. I will have no problem doing so and telling them what I know if they do ask. But I really doubt this case ends up in court, the charge was a result of relentless pressure from a few.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: mfswallace on May 21, 2016, 08:06:49 AM
for all bearpaws and kiti excuses there is no legal authority  for this elk to have been shot where it was  :twocents: 

Now the court will decide
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: grundy53 on May 21, 2016, 08:15:37 AM
Wow alot more keeps piling on since I looked at this site. Like I said I got on here to clear things up. I guess that didn't happen at all. The hunter seems to be judged worse and many of you discredited me. Do what you need to do.

The true fact is at the time the only question in anobodys  mind  was could a rifle be used, or did it need to be a muzzleloader. So they did what we were tought 30 years ago in the fire arms safety course and called and asked the question. Mr. Grant said that it could not be killed with a rifle in that unit. Then was asked if it could because the hunter was disabled.  He said he would figure it out. 16 minutes later (documented) he called back and told them they shouldn't use a rifle and muzzleloader was fine. That shows Grant knew the exact unit this was in.

I have been hunting for more than 3 decades. I miss the times when things didn't seem to change so much. I appaud the people on here that seem to know every rule all the time as thinges change. We all try to keep up on everything.  But are not afraid to call and ask for clarification when needed. In this case WDFG didn't just say it was ok, they went and double checked and again gave the ok.
This was a high profile tag, nobody involved wanted any issues in this case.

Worst part on this forum is the hunter has had some very bad things said about him. He is one of the most generous good people alive. And has done more for the elk than 95% of the hunters in this state combined.
If this is true then Mr Grant should be reprimanded.

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on May 21, 2016, 08:20:35 AM
Wow alot more keeps piling on since I looked at this site. Like I said I got on here to clear things up. I guess that didn't happen at all. The hunter seems to be judged worse and many of you discredited me. Do what you need to do.

The true fact is at the time the only question in anobodys  mind  was could a rifle be used, or did it need to be a muzzleloader. So they did what we were tought 30 years ago in the fire arms safety course and called and asked the question. Mr. Grant said that it could not be killed with a rifle in that unit. Then was asked if it could because the hunter was disabled.  He said he would figure it out. 16 minutes later (documented) he called back and told them they shouldn't use a rifle and muzzleloader was fine. That shows Grant knew the exact unit this was in.

I have been hunting for more than 3 decades. I miss the times when things didn't seem to change so much. I appaud the people on here that seem to know every rule all the time as thinges change. We all try to keep up on everything.  But are not afraid to call and ask for clarification when needed. In this case WDFG didn't just say it was ok, they went and double checked and again gave the ok.
This was a high profile tag, nobody involved wanted any issues in this case.

Worst part on this forum is the hunter has had some very bad things said about him. He is one of the most generous good people alive. And has done more for the elk than 95% of the hunters in this state combined.
If this is true then Mr Grant should be reprimanded.

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk

Agree. I believe the department hoped this would go away. A few people that didn't know the details kept the pressure on and the county caved to that pressure.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: grundy53 on May 21, 2016, 08:22:33 AM
Wow alot more keeps piling on since I looked at this site. Like I said I got on here to clear things up. I guess that didn't happen at all. The hunter seems to be judged worse and many of you discredited me. Do what you need to do.

The true fact is at the time the only question in anobodys  mind  was could a rifle be used, or did it need to be a muzzleloader. So they did what we were tought 30 years ago in the fire arms safety course and called and asked the question. Mr. Grant said that it could not be killed with a rifle in that unit. Then was asked if it could because the hunter was disabled.  He said he would figure it out. 16 minutes later (documented) he called back and told them they shouldn't use a rifle and muzzleloader was fine. That shows Grant knew the exact unit this was in.

I have been hunting for more than 3 decades. I miss the times when things didn't seem to change so much. I appaud the people on here that seem to know every rule all the time as thinges change. We all try to keep up on everything.  But are not afraid to call and ask for clarification when needed. In this case WDFG didn't just say it was ok, they went and double checked and again gave the ok.
This was a high profile tag, nobody involved wanted any issues in this case.

Worst part on this forum is the hunter has had some very bad things said about him. He is one of the most generous good people alive. And has done more for the elk than 95% of the hunters in this state combined.
If this is true then Mr Grant should be reprimanded.

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk

Agree. I believe the department hoped this would go away. A few people that didn't know the details kept the pressure on and the county caved to that pressure.
I'm glad the county did the right thing.

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: TheHunt on May 21, 2016, 08:24:50 AM
Depending on the date when this "hunt" occurred, there is a antlerless hunt in that unit mid November until mid December. You could the WDFW office and say: I'm elk hunting and I'm not sure if I can hunt with a mod rifle or not, can you help me out? Response: Where are you? I'll check and call you back. Ring: You can hunt there but it's a firearms restricted area, so shotgun, muzzle loader or bow. Response: Thanks!

Thing is the other elk that was shot in a "yard" was legal. This elk was not, ever! Oh yea, it was shot in a yard too!

Mr. Grant knew the exact bull that was was going to be taken. There was no trickery or word's twisted  in this case. At the time he gave gave the good to go he was up for promotion. Since then he has gotten it and tried hard to distance himself from this. He is an honest guy and will tell the truth on the stand. And that will be that he double checked to make sure it was all good.

I'm curious are you testifying in the case. Your  giving the impression that you know specific details related to the case, which is interesting because generally open forum web conversation about "facts" of a case are normally not recommended by either side. And I'm sure Grant would not appreciate the nature at which he is being thrown under the bus in regards to his alleged involvement.

At this point I have not been asked to testify. I will have no problem doing so and telling them what I know if they do ask. But I really doubt this case ends up in court, the charge was a result of relentless pressure from a few.

I agree with you on your last comment.  I think there is the relentless pressure of a few. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bobcat on May 21, 2016, 08:25:09 AM
Sorry but this makes no sense to me. Who calls the WDFW and asks about hunting in a unit that is closed? Why would that even be considered an option? I don't believe it happened that way. Not in a million years would I ever think to call and ask permission to illegally kill an elk.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: idahohuntr on May 21, 2016, 08:27:00 AM
If Reichert had not been previously charged and punished for lying to investigators about illegal elk hunting...I might believe him.  I doubt seriously an officer gave clear guidance that it was legal to kill this bull...if he did, then once reichert is convicted and stripped of his hunting priveleges sportsmen need to seek removal of this officer for his involvement in this criminal activity.

Kitti, you still haven't answered my very simple question.  What about the regs caused you to call wdfw regarding the legality of shooting this bull?  Obviously you knew something wasn't right.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on May 21, 2016, 08:27:07 AM
Sorry but this makes no sense to me. Who calls the WDFW and asks about hunting in a unit that is closed? Why would that even be considered an option? I don't believe it happened that way. Not in a million years would I ever think to call and ask permission to illegally kill an elk.

Entitlement?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on May 21, 2016, 08:30:47 AM

The true fact is at the time the only question in anobodys  mind  was could a rifle be used, or did it need to be a muzzleloader. So they did what we were tought 30 years ago in the fire arms safety course and called and asked the question. Mr. Grant said that it could not be killed with a rifle in that unit. Then was asked if it could because the hunter was disabled.  He said he would figure it out. 16 minutes later (documented) he called back and told them they shouldn't use a rifle and muzzleloader was fine. That shows Grant knew the exact unit this was in.

So, why was the only question in anyone's mind about whether a modern rifle could be used. Did anyone not question if it was OK to shoot s bull in 334? Was that an oversight on everyone's part (maybe including Mr. Grant) that 334 was closed for the raffle or auction tags? That's what it sounds like to me........a mistake on everyone's part not knowing that 334 was closed. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Kazekurt on May 21, 2016, 08:37:26 AM
He is one of the most generous good people alive. And has done more for the elk than 95% of the hunters in this state combined.

 What more has he done than the bidder $1000 behind his bid wouldn't have done?

While I appreciate the  contributions this guy has made to conservation, One can certainly also argue that  by being involved in two high-profile cases  in which wildlife rules were violated,  (either knowingly or unknowingly,  it really doesn't matter the damage is the same) he has probably done more damage to the hunting community than 95% of the people on here.  It only takes one "Cecil the lion" to do a lot of damage.   Unfortunately, trophy hunting already carries a negative stigma with most of the non-hunting population  so when a trophy hunter violates rules  in an effort to take the biggest baddest animal around it provides them more ammunition to push for changes and  regulations that cripple the tradition and means of  subsidence that many of us cherish.   I am quite certain based upon Mr. Reichert  available resources , that he has lawyers on retainer and advisors that could know the game pamphlet backwards and forwards and advise him if he wanted that.  I personally hunt three states. I make an effort each year to read the pamphlet for each state  so I am aware of the rules and regulations I will be expected to follow.  The bottom line is That  with some hunters, the end justifies the means.  If they  have a certain animal targeted, they will do what it takes to get it.   There is no doubt in my mind Mr. Reichert could have chose 100 quality bulls to shoot legally with that tag But choose to push the limits on one that involved some gray area.  People on here can claim all they want that he did not know that he was in a unit not open to branch antler Bulls.  That is your right to claim that and probably smart  from a legal standpoint but recognize that the vast, vast majority of people who hear about this case will not believe you.  In the end, your "ignorance and permission granted" argument may suffice to stave of prosecution but the damage is already done.  The outcome of Mr Reicherts legal proceedings will do little to stem the black eye the hunting community has suffered as a result of this debacle.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JimmyHoffa on May 21, 2016, 08:39:53 AM
 :yeah:
The bad press he's just generated has probably done more bad than the last decade of good by all elk hunters including him.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Skillet on May 21, 2016, 08:40:43 AM

The true fact is at the time the only question in anobodys  mind  was could a rifle be used, or did it need to be a muzzleloader. So they did what we were tought 30 years ago in the fire arms safety course and called and asked the question. Mr. Grant said that it could not be killed with a rifle in that unit. Then was asked if it could because the hunter was disabled.  He said he would figure it out. 16 minutes later (documented) he called back and told them they shouldn't use a rifle and muzzleloader was fine. That shows Grant knew the exact unit this was in.

So, why was the only question in anyone's mind about whether a modern rifle could be used. Did anyone not question if it was OK to shoot s bull in 334? Was that an oversight on everyone's part (maybe including Mr. Grant) that 334 was closed for the raffle or auction tags? That's what it sounds like to me........a mistake on everyone's part not knowing that 334 was closed. 
I tend to agree with Curly.  The wrong issue was being addressed in the calls between the wdfw and the accused, and the answer to the wrong question was used to justify the illegal take of this bull.  This demonstrates either a gross incompetence or deliberate attempt to skirt the law.

I liken it to a mugger calling a local police precinct if he can carry a pistol in a gun-free zone.  And, after being told no, he just conducts his muggings with a switchblade instead.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Kazekurt on May 21, 2016, 09:01:36 AM
I would like to issue a challenge to MR. Reichert.  Since your supporters on this site have clearly tried to  emphasize the numerous positive contributions you have made to conservation and hunting  over the handful of alleged indiscretions  you have been linked too; I'm assuming a champion of conservation like yourself would not want an animal in  his trophy room that had any stigma of indescretion associated with it.  If you are found innocent of all charges and allowed to keep the bull I challenge you to pay to have the bull taxidermied and then to donate it to the city of Ellensburg to be put on display in a public building and thereby enjoyed  in perpetuity by the local residents who have come to love that bull. I believe such an act would go a long way towards showing that you are in fact the man that your supporters  characterize you to be and would somewhat mitigate the negative stigma associated with your hunt; especially in the area in which the bull was taken.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: idahohuntr on May 21, 2016, 09:01:57 AM
He is one of the most generous good people alive. And has done more for the elk than 95% of the hunters in this state combined.

 What more has he done than the bidder $1000 behind his bid wouldn't have done?

While I appreciate the  contributions this guy has made to conservation, One can certainly also argue that  by being involved in two high-profile cases  in which wildlife rules were violated,  (either knowingly or unknowingly,  it really doesn't matter the damage is the same) he has probably done more damage to the hunting community than 95% of the people on here.  It only takes one "Cecil the lion" to do a lot of damage.   Unfortunately, trophy hunting already carries a negative stigma with most of the non-hunting population  so when a trophy hunter violates rules  in an effort to take the biggest baddest animal around it provides them more ammunition to push for changes and  regulations that cripple the tradition and means of  subsidence that many of us cherish.   I am quite certain based upon Mr. Reichert  available resources , that he has lawyers on retainer and advisors that could know the game pamphlet backwards and forwards and advise him if he wanted that.  I personally hunt three states. I make an effort each year to read the pamphlet for each state  so I am aware of the rules and regulations I will be expected to follow.  The bottom line is That  with some hunters, the end justifies the means.  If they  have a certain animal targeted, they will do what it takes to get it.   There is no doubt in my mind Mr. Reichert could have chose 100 quality bulls to shoot legally with that tag But choose to push the limits on one that involved some gray area.  People on here can claim all they want that he did not know that he was in a unit not open to branch antler Bulls.  That is your right to claim that and probably smart  from a legal standpoint but recognize that the vast, vast majority of people who hear about this case will not believe you.  In the end, your "ignorance and permission granted" argument may suffice to stave of prosecution but the damage is already done.  The outcome of Mr Reicherts legal proceedings will do little to stem the black eye the hunting community has suffered as a result of this debacle.
Very well said!

I would also point out from a financial perspective...these raffle and auction tags are specks of dust in a budget.  Just us commoners in E wa combined pay more for conservation and wildlife in one year than reichert has in his lifetime...even if we include his criminal fines :chuckle:

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Landowner on May 21, 2016, 09:22:28 AM
The issue for me is why this tag holder was intent on killing a bull that had a well known reputation of being tame under any reasonable hunting standard.  This bull appears to have let his natural guard and instincts down because he was  a part of the community, so to speak.     

And the landowner who let him do it, well, that's a another troubling matter in my book.   

Remarkable.  Time to find a new sport, maybe bird watching. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JLS on May 21, 2016, 09:36:14 AM
From the very beginning this was never going to end well.  Stevie Wonder could see that. 

Probably the most concise assessment of this entire mess, right there.

Regardless of what Mr. Reichert spends annually on rich man/auction tags, he has cost us all with this episode.  The fact that he would WANT to kill this bull makes me question everything about his conservation ethic.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Kazekurt on May 21, 2016, 09:55:58 AM
He is one of the most generous good people alive. And has done more for the elk than 95% of the hunters in this state combined.

 What more has he done than the bidder $1000 behind his bid wouldn't have done?

I couldn't agree more with hunt fool.  While I'm not disputing that the money is put to good use; the stigma painting auction tags as an altruistic act of conservation is false IMHO.  To be altruistic, the doner would simply donate $50k for the good of the species with  no expected return.  With auction tags, the winner simply pays market price( or something close)for a sweet tag. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on May 21, 2016, 09:57:27 AM
 On a side note he just may have accidently  improved Washingtons supreme Court next year. Prosecuting what  the progressive wetsiders see as  a  trophy hunter  might get  him votes and Madsen replaced. Sure hope it does!

http://www.seattlepi.com/local/politics/article/Chief-Justice-Madsen-draws-a-challenger-7692651.php?roi=echo3-34770541482-35460313-2959ce9dabff170bd91e0e35367ce109&
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 21, 2016, 09:58:45 AM
From the very beginning this was never going to end well.  Stevie Wonder could see that. 

Probably the most concise assessment of this entire mess, right there.

Regardless of what Mr. Reichert spends annually on rich man/auction tags, he has cost us all with this episode.  The fact that he would WANT to kill this bull makes me question everything about his conservation ethic.

Yes he has, and more than anything I resent the stigma he has cast over the hunting community with this reckless and irresponsible act.  We as hunters have not done a thing to bring this mess on, but those who oppose hunting will attempt to use this incident as a broad brush to tar us with. 

But for Mr Reichert et all's actions there would be no controversy.  And just to clear something up, I sent an email, made one phone call and paid one visit to the Prosecutor's Office.  The call and visit were to ask a question or two and the email was to encourage prosecution if that is where the evidence leads.  And that is a stone cold natural fact. 

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: STIKNSTRINGBOW on May 21, 2016, 10:19:54 AM
Not involved in this, but much like a vehicle accident, I cannot help but look...

What sticks out to me is the REMOVAL of the animal from the place it was harvested in 334 and relocated to 338 prior to being processed, that demonstrates an action that clearly indicates the knowledge that it was in a closed unit, and an attempt to misrepresent the location of the kill.
They just got caught.  :twocents:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: HntnFsh on May 21, 2016, 10:24:08 AM
Not involved in this, but much like a vehicle accident, I cannot help but look...

What sticks out to me is the REMOVAL of the animal from the place it was harvested in 334 and relocated to 338 prior to being processed, that demonstrates an action that clearly indicates the knowledge that it was in a closed unit, and an attempt to misrepresent the location of the kill.
They just got caught.  :twocents:

Or it could mean that the property owner didn't want a gut pile in his field so they took it somewhere else to do that.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on May 21, 2016, 10:28:58 AM
Not involved in this, but much like a vehicle accident, I cannot help but look...

What sticks out to me is the REMOVAL of the animal from the place it was harvested in 334 and relocated to 338 prior to being processed, that demonstrates an action that clearly indicates the knowledge that it was in a closed unit, and an attempt to misrepresent the location of the kill.
They just got caught.  :twocents:


A lot of folks see issue with the fact that this happened. I don't. We hunt farmer's fields all the time. I don't like to leave gut piles in the middle of a wheat stubble field and those fields are out in the middle of nowhere.  If this hunt went down as close to the houses and such as it presumably did, I wouldn't want to leave the gutpile there either. I can see their reasoning in removing it. That's all. Not standing up for this hunt or anything. Just saying...There may very well be good reason for this.

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: STIKNSTRINGBOW on May 21, 2016, 11:02:30 AM
Removal from the field, I understand.
I have done that also, however taking it into a different unit?
I also understand that the boundary might be as close as across the road, in the article it states it was relocated to a different field.
just smells fishy...
But then, I am jealous. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jmscon on May 21, 2016, 11:46:52 AM
I'm all for innocent until proven guilty! I am guilty of passing judgement on this guy because of the emotions that I have against situations like this. After reading most of the other threads about this issue, most people on here are just as guilty as I am and have similar emotions as I do concerning this incident.

With the limited info that we have of the incident and the knowledge of what is listed in the regs and game laws we assume that there was no way that TR was acting legally. I hope as a resident of this state and a citizen of this country that he is given a fair trial. Then and only if all the truth comes out will we know the whole story.

We know that unit 334 is closed to branch antler bull hunting. I think that changes this year and will be up to WDFW discretion, as far as the raffle and auctions tags go. And the way it appears, this guy either made the exception himself or was able to get an ok from the state to be an exception from the rules. The way this appears is maddening! I don't think the rest of us would be able to get this ok. If he did in fact get permission from a WDFW officer that's where my jealousy comes in, how does he get special privileges? Money that I will never get close to in my lifetime?

I doubt that I will ever have the means to win an auction tag but if I did I would make every effort to abide by the laws and I suspect that everyone else in the state would expect the same from me.

Some of the questions I have, and maybe kiticaas can clear this up, are:

-Who was with TR?

-Was it a guide?

-Did TR make the call or was it another person in the party?

You'd think a guide wouldn't even take him into the unit!

I hope that WDFW didn't give permission. Not that I want to see the book thrown at him if he is found guilty but for the sake of WDFW. I would hope that they wouldn't make exceptions to the game laws for individuals!!! If someone in WDFW gave him the ok I hope that they get severely reprimanded!!!

 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: mfswallace on May 21, 2016, 11:57:25 AM
IF Sgt. Grant did get or give the ok, I'm sure this will lead to others "making a call" and doing what they want.

PopeSHawn
If TR gets off because of this "call" will case law precedent be set or will it just be a first instance and it needs more actual cases to be hard and fast??

if so you can bet it will be happening more often!!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on May 21, 2016, 12:02:12 PM
Removal from the field, I understand.
I have done that also, however taking it into a different unit?
I also understand that the boundary might be as close as across the road, in the article it states it was relocated to a different field.
just smells fishy...
But then, I am jealous. 
One of the guys who was involved in the caping and gutting of the bull has a shop in the other unit. My guesstimate is they took it there to use his shop. I bet that's their reasoning.

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bradslam on May 21, 2016, 12:10:52 PM
I would like to issue a challenge to MR. Reichert.  Since your supporters on this site have clearly tried to  emphasize the numerous positive contributions you have made to conservation and hunting  over the handful of alleged indiscretions  you have been linked too; I'm assuming a champion of conservation like yourself would not want an animal in  his trophy room that had any stigma of indescretion associated with it.  If you are found innocent of all charges and allowed to keep the bull I challenge you to pay to have the bull taxidermied and then to donate it to the city of Ellensburg to be put on display in a public building and thereby enjoyed  in perpetuity by the local residents who have come to love that bull. I believe such an act would go a long way towards showing that you are in fact the man that your supporters  characterize you to be and would somewhat mitigate the negative stigma associated with your hunt; especially in the area in which the bull was taken.

 :yeah:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on May 21, 2016, 12:51:00 PM
I guess I'm just not clear on how some of you feel about this.

Could you all restate your positions one more time?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jmscon on May 21, 2016, 12:52:56 PM
 :yeah: :beatdeadhorse:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on May 21, 2016, 01:24:37 PM
From the very beginning this was never going to end well.  Stevie Wonder could see that. 

Probably the most concise assessment of this entire mess, right there.

Regardless of what Mr. Reichert spends annually on rich man/auction tags, he has cost us all with this episode.  The fact that he would WANT to kill this bull makes me question everything about his conservation ethic.

Yes he has, and more than anything I resent the stigma he has cast over the hunting community with this reckless and irresponsible act.  We as hunters have not done a thing to bring this mess on, but those who oppose hunting will attempt to use this incident as a broad brush to tar us with. 

But for Mr Reichert et all's actions there would be no controversy.  And just to clear something up, I sent an email, made one phone call and paid one visit to the Prosecutor's Office.  The call and visit were to ask a question or two and the email was to encourage prosecution if that is where the evidence leads.  And that is a stone cold natural fact.

That stigma was very well promoted by you trying to further your which hunt on forums all the way to the east coast.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on May 21, 2016, 01:54:43 PM
He is one of the most generous good people alive. And has done more for the elk than 95% of the hunters in this state combined.

 What more has he done than the bidder $1000 behind his bid wouldn't have done?

While I appreciate the  contributions this guy has made to conservation, One can certainly also argue that  by being involved in two high-profile cases  in which wildlife rules were violated,  (either knowingly or unknowingly,  it really doesn't matter the damage is the same) he has probably done more damage to the hunting community than 95% of the people on here.  It only takes one "Cecil the lion" to do a lot of damage.   Unfortunately, trophy hunting already carries a negative stigma with most of the non-hunting population  so when a trophy hunter violates rules  in an effort to take the biggest baddest animal around it provides them more ammunition to push for changes and  regulations that cripple the tradition and means of  subsidence that many of us cherish.   I am quite certain based upon Mr. Reichert  available resources , that he has lawyers on retainer and advisors that could know the game pamphlet backwards and forwards and advise him if he wanted that.  I personally hunt three states. I make an effort each year to read the pamphlet for each state  so I am aware of the rules and regulations I will be expected to follow.  The bottom line is That  with some hunters, the end justifies the means.  If they  have a certain animal targeted, they will do what it takes to get it.   There is no doubt in my mind Mr. Reichert could have chose 100 quality bulls to shoot legally with that tag But choose to push the limits on one that involved some gray area.  People on here can claim all they want that he did not know that he was in a unit not open to branch antler Bulls.  That is your right to claim that and probably smart  from a legal standpoint but recognize that the vast, vast majority of people who hear about this case will not believe you.  In the end, your "ignorance and permission granted" argument may suffice to stave of prosecution but the damage is already done.  The outcome of Mr Reicherts legal proceedings will do little to stem the black eye the hunting community has suffered as a result of this debacle.

 Exceptional post right there!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: M_ray on May 21, 2016, 01:56:51 PM
He is one of the most generous good people alive. And has done more for the elk than 95% of the hunters in this state combined.

 What more has he done than the bidder $1000 behind his bid wouldn't have done?

Well if you paid any attention,  I believe it was last year he bid up his own bI'd by another 5k when it was clear there was not another bid coming in.

 Wow, I stand corrected, his $5k is indeed more for elk than 95% of the rest of the hunters in this state have done combined. :chuckle:  :mor:

Guess the moron sign was pointed to me. That's fine All I was trying to do here is tell the honest side of the story of a good man that has put hundreds of thousands of dollars into it in the last few years.

The situation last season was unfortunate.  The honest truth is nobody involved in the situation tried to get around anything or cheat any rules. They checked,  and Grant double checked to make sure it was all on the up and up.

  :rolleyes: The two guys guiding TR grew up in the valley and knew full well that that bull was in 334 no if's and's or but's about it. In fact BR was told face to face to "STOP" going after that bull!" And I believe CC was too.

 So again tell us just what you are clearing up for us all? Using words like "honest" and "most generous" "they checked" doesn't clear anything up, please convince me that two guys that fancy themselves upcoming Mossback guides and a guy who has bought what? 20 or more gov and auction tags in his lifetime cant understand that 334 is closed to branch bull hunting and don't know where they are?  :o 

 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: time2hunt on May 21, 2016, 02:14:27 PM
M-Ray your such a little gossip queen please tell me who told me to stop f-ing with that bull ??? As I have said earlier I had no part in guiding TR on that hunt since I had been archery hunting the two weeks prior in the Okanogan. I was ask if I would help gut and cape the bull for TR. So yes I'm guilty for helping a friend. So Let the court figure this out mess out. Peace out till it goes to court.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on May 21, 2016, 02:24:22 PM
M-Ray your such a little gossip queen please tell me who told me to stop f-ing with that bull ??? As I have said earlier I had no part in guiding TR on that hunt since I had been archery hunting the two weeks prior in the Okanogan. I was ask if I would help gut and cape the bull for TR. So yes I'm guilty for helping a friend. So Let the court figure this out mess out. Peace out till it goes to court.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Exactly. He will not tell you who said that because nobody did. This would not even be a story without a few seattle and tacoma guys fabricating the truth. Page after page they say things like this. But will not back it up with with names.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jmscon on May 21, 2016, 02:31:32 PM
That's all we do here in the big city is fabricate! Fabrication capitol of the state! :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Antlershed on May 21, 2016, 02:36:42 PM
Allegedly...If there really was confusion of the regs, or special permission was trying to be obtained, why wasn't the question on the phone,"Hey, I have the raffle tag, is there any way I can get permission to shoot a branch antlered bull in 334?"

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on May 21, 2016, 02:42:15 PM
M-Ray your such a little gossip queen please tell me who told me to stop f-ing with that bull ??? As I have said earlier I had no part in guiding TR on that hunt since I had been archery hunting the two weeks prior in the Okanogan. I was ask if I would help gut and cape the bull for TR. So yes I'm guilty for helping a friend. So Let the court figure this out mess out. Peace out till it goes to court.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on May 21, 2016, 02:44:53 PM
M-Ray your such a little gossip queen please tell me who told me to stop f-ing with that bull ??? As I have said earlier I had no part in guiding TR on that hunt since I had been archery hunting the two weeks prior in the Okanogan. I was ask if I would help gut and cape the bull for TR. So yes I'm guilty for helping a friend. So Let the court figure this out mess out. Peace out till it goes to court.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Exactly. He will not tell you who said that because nobody did. This would not even be a story without a few seattle and tacoma guys fabricating the truth. Page after page they say things like this. But will not back it up with with names.
No offense, but with you throwing out the lawsuit word all over the last few pages of this thread, why would anyone mention any names?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jmscon on May 21, 2016, 02:51:12 PM
Please reread my post on the previous page
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: time2hunt on May 21, 2016, 02:51:51 PM
Please don't associate me with kitcaashunt I have no clue who this person is. The lawsuit was made by a separate party.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on May 21, 2016, 02:52:48 PM
Please don't associate me with kitcaashunt I have no clue who this person is. The lawsuit was made by a separate party.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Huh..interesting, and noted.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 21, 2016, 03:03:03 PM
From the very beginning this was never going to end well.  Stevie Wonder could see that. 

Probably the most concise assessment of this entire mess, right there.

 The fact that he would WANT to kill this bull makes me question everything about his conservation ethic.

Regardless of what Mr. Reichert spends annually on rich man/auction tags, he has cost us all with this episode.

Yes he has, and more than anything I resent the stigma he has cast over the hunting community with this reckless and irresponsible act.  We as hunters have not done a thing to bring this mess on, but those who oppose hunting will attempt to use this incident as a broad brush to tar us with. 

But for Mr Reichert et all's actions there would be no controversy.  And just to clear something up, I sent an email, made one phone call and paid one visit to the Prosecutor's Office.  The call and visit were to ask a question or two and the email was to encourage prosecution if that is where the evidence leads.  And that is a stone cold natural fact.



That stigma was very well promoted by you trying to further your which hunt on forums all the way to the east coast.

You referring to this thread that was 41 pages before I joined it? 

3125263 - Mon Sep 23 2013 05:52 PM Re: elk gov tag [Re: jakesroost]



you are correct that Tod has had past problems/issues. What I can assuredly tell you 100% is that while tod was with ECO he was a fine upstanding man and we didn't need dig up his or anyone else's "skeletons." He explained to Jack early on during their phone conversations the incident you are referring to. Jack was confident that Tod had seen the error of his ways and paid his "debt to society" so to speak and he started on a clean slate when he came to ECO.

The bull was killed on State forest land not national forest land so there is no concern in that aspect. ECO runs a tight ship and there is no room for rule breakers or rule stretchers among our ranks! THAT IS 100% TRUTH
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on May 21, 2016, 03:09:25 PM
It'll be nice when this is over, or the draw results come out, maybe then we can talk about rifles and huntin.... Naw I'm sure the the whiners will still be whining , about something ..
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on May 21, 2016, 03:11:41 PM
From the very beginning this was never going to end well.  Stevie Wonder could see that. 

Probably the most concise assessment of this entire mess, right there.

 The fact that he would WANT to kill this bull makes me question everything about his conservation ethic.

Regardless of what Mr. Reichert spends annually on rich man/auction tags, he has cost us all with this episode.

Yes he has, and more than anything I resent the stigma he has cast over the hunting community with this reckless and irresponsible act.  We as hunters have not done a thing to bring this mess on, but those who oppose hunting will attempt to use this incident as a broad brush to tar us with. 

But for Mr Reichert et all's actions there would be no controversy.  And just to clear something up, I sent an email, made one phone call and paid one visit to the Prosecutor's Office.  The call and visit were to ask a question or two and the email was to encourage prosecution if that is where the evidence leads.  And that is a stone cold natural fact.



That stigma was very well promoted by you trying to further your which hunt on forums all the way to the east coast.

You referring to this thread that was 41 pages before I joined it? 

3125263 - Mon Sep 23 2013 05:52 PM Re: elk gov tag [Re: jakesroost]



you are correct that Tod has had past problems/issues. What I can assuredly tell you 100% is that while tod was with ECO he was a fine upstanding man and we didn't need dig up his or anyone else's "skeletons." He explained to Jack early on during their phone conversations the incident you are referring to. Jack was confident that Tod had seen the error of his ways and paid his "debt to society" so to speak and he started on a clean slate when he came to ECO.

The bull was killed on State forest land not national forest land so there is no concern in that aspect. ECO runs a tight ship and there is no room for rule breakers or rule stretchers among our ranks! THAT IS 100% TRUTH
What the heck...
What does a thread comment from 3 years ago have anything to do with anything?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on May 21, 2016, 03:13:16 PM
From the very beginning this was never going to end well.  Stevie Wonder could see that. 

Probably the most concise assessment of this entire mess, right there.

 The fact that he would WANT to kill this bull makes me question everything about his conservation ethic.

Regardless of what Mr. Reichert spends annually on rich man/auction tags, he has cost us all with this episode.

Yes he has, and more than anything I resent the stigma he has cast over the hunting community with this reckless and irresponsible act.  We as hunters have not done a thing to bring this mess on, but those who oppose hunting will attempt to use this incident as a broad brush to tar us with. 

But for Mr Reichert et all's actions there would be no controversy.  And just to clear something up, I sent an email, made one phone call and paid one visit to the Prosecutor's Office.  The call and visit were to ask a question or two and the email was to encourage prosecution if that is where the evidence leads.  And that is a stone cold natural fact.



That stigma was very well promoted by you trying to further your which hunt on forums all the way to the east coast.

You referring to this thread that was 41 pages before I joined it? 

3125263 - Mon Sep 23 2013 05:52 PM Re: elk gov tag [Re: jakesroost]



you are correct that Tod has had past problems/issues. What I can assuredly tell you 100% is that while tod was with ECO he was a fine upstanding man and we didn't need dig up his or anyone else's "skeletons." He explained to Jack early on during their phone conversations the incident you are referring to. Jack was confident that Tod had seen the error of his ways and paid his "debt to society" so to speak and he started on a clean slate when he came to ECO.

The bull was killed on State forest land not national forest land so there is no concern in that aspect. ECO runs a tight ship and there is no room for rule breakers or rule stretchers among our ranks! THAT IS 100% TRUTH
What the heck...
What does a thread comment from 3 years ago have anything to do with anything?


Is this post even from this forum?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: TVHunts on May 21, 2016, 03:13:31 PM
He is one of the most generous good people alive. And has done more for the elk than 95% of the hunters in this state combined.

 What more has he done than the bidder $1000 behind his bid wouldn't have done?

While I appreciate the  contributions this guy has made to conservation, One can certainly also argue that  by being involved in two high-profile cases  in which wildlife rules were violated,  (either knowingly or unknowingly,  it really doesn't matter the damage is the same) he has probably done more damage to the hunting community than 95% of the people on here.  It only takes one "Cecil the lion" to do a lot of damage.   Unfortunately, trophy hunting already carries a negative stigma with most of the non-hunting population  so when a trophy hunter violates rules  in an effort to take the biggest baddest animal around it provides them more ammunition to push for changes and  regulations that cripple the tradition and means of  subsidence that many of us cherish.   I am quite certain based upon Mr. Reichert  available resources , that he has lawyers on retainer and advisors that could know the game pamphlet backwards and forwards and advise him if he wanted that.  I personally hunt three states. I make an effort each year to read the pamphlet for each state  so I am aware of the rules and regulations I will be expected to follow.  The bottom line is That  with some hunters, the end justifies the means.  If they  have a certain animal targeted, they will do what it takes to get it.   There is no doubt in my mind Mr. Reichert could have chose 100 quality bulls to shoot legally with that tag But choose to push the limits on one that involved some gray area.  People on here can claim all they want that he did not know that he was in a unit not open to branch antler Bulls.  That is your right to claim that and probably smart  from a legal standpoint but recognize that the vast, vast majority of people who hear about this case will not believe you.  In the end, your "ignorance and permission granted" argument may suffice to stave of prosecution but the damage is already done.  The outcome of Mr Reicherts legal proceedings will do little to stem the black eye the hunting community has suffered as a result of this debacle.

You Sir are spot on!  Well said.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 21, 2016, 03:20:25 PM
From the very beginning this was never going to end well.  Stevie Wonder could see that. 

Probably the most concise assessment of this entire mess, right there.

 The fact that he would WANT to kill this bull makes me question everything about his conservation ethic.

Regardless of what Mr. Reichert spends annually on rich man/auction tags, he has cost us all with this episode.

Yes he has, and more than anything I resent the stigma he has cast over the hunting community with this reckless and irresponsible act.  We as hunters have not done a thing to bring this mess on, but those who oppose hunting will attempt to use this incident as a broad brush to tar us with. 

But for Mr Reichert et all's actions there would be no controversy.  And just to clear something up, I sent an email, made one phone call and paid one visit to the Prosecutor's Office.  The call and visit were to ask a question or two and the email was to encourage prosecution if that is where the evidence leads.  And that is a stone cold natural fact.



That stigma was very well promoted by you trying to further your which hunt on forums all the way to the east coast.

You referring to this thread that was 41 pages before I joined it? 

3125263 - Mon Sep 23 2013 05:52 PM Re: elk gov tag [Re: jakesroost]



you are correct that Tod has had past problems/issues. What I can assuredly tell you 100% is that while tod was with ECO he was a fine upstanding man and we didn't need dig up his or anyone else's "skeletons." He explained to Jack early on during their phone conversations the incident you are referring to. Jack was confident that Tod had seen the error of his ways and paid his "debt to society" so to speak and he started on a clean slate when he came to ECO.

The bull was killed on State forest land not national forest land so there is no concern in that aspect. ECO runs a tight ship and there is no room for rule breakers or rule stretchers among our ranks! THAT IS 100% TRUTH
What the heck...
What does a thread comment from 3 years ago have anything to do with anything?


Is this post even from this forum?

No it is from a forum back east.  The thread is 42 pages long and in that thread Mr Reichert does not fare so well.  It is hard to locate it using a search engine.  I was introduced to it via someone who sent me an email.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnfmly on May 21, 2016, 03:35:25 PM
Kit & time
 Thank you for the real story
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: M_ray on May 21, 2016, 03:40:13 PM
M-Ray your such a little gossip queen please tell me who told me to stop f-ing with that bull ??? As I have said earlier I had no part in guiding TR on that hunt since I had been archery hunting the two weeks prior in the Okanogan. I was ask if I would help gut and cape the bull for TR. So yes I'm guilty for helping a friend. So Let the court figure this out mess out. Peace out till it goes to court.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Exactly. He will not tell you who said that because nobody did. This would not even be a story without a few seattle and tacoma guys fabricating the truth. Page after page they say things like this. But will not back it up with with names.

Lol ...Harry told both you and CC! I also find it strange time2hunt that you were there every step of te way all week driving around with TR and then your not there for the 20 min he shoots it ... Then you show up for the gut party? I held up my end and told you who told you to lay off ... Now tell me do I have the rest of this wrong?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: time2hunt on May 21, 2016, 03:45:03 PM
Wow haven't spoke to Harry in over a year. And like I said archery hunting up North so you better check and get your story straight.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: M_ray on May 21, 2016, 03:51:10 PM
Wow haven't spoke to Harry in over a year. And like I said archery hunting up North so you better check and get your story straight.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

He will be interested to know you are calling him a liar ...  :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: time2hunt on May 21, 2016, 03:53:55 PM
He knows my number  tell him to call me so at least he can say he talked with me this year.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on May 21, 2016, 04:00:18 PM
From the very beginning this was never going to end well.  Stevie Wonder could see that. 

Probably the most concise assessment of this entire mess, right there.

 The fact that he would WANT to kill this bull makes me question everything about his conservation ethic.

Regardless of what Mr. Reichert spends annually on rich man/auction tags, he has cost us all with this episode.

Yes he has, and more than anything I resent the stigma he has cast over the hunting community with this reckless and irresponsible act.  We as hunters have not done a thing to bring this mess on, but those who oppose hunting will attempt to use this incident as a broad brush to tar us with. 

But for Mr Reichert et all's actions there would be no controversy.  And just to clear something up, I sent an email, made one phone call and paid one visit to the Prosecutor's Office.  The call and visit were to ask a question or two and the email was to encourage prosecution if that is where the evidence leads.  And that is a stone cold natural fact.



That stigma was very well promoted by you trying to further your which hunt on forums all the way to the east coast.

You referring to this thread that was 41 pages before I joined it? 

3125263 - Mon Sep 23 2013 05:52 PM Re: elk gov tag [Re: jakesroost]



you are correct that Tod has had past problems/issues. What I can assuredly tell you 100% is that while tod was with ECO he was a fine upstanding man and we didn't need dig up his or anyone else's "skeletons." He explained to Jack early on during their phone conversations the incident you are referring to. Jack was confident that Tod had seen the error of his ways and paid his "debt to society" so to speak and he started on a clean slate when he came to ECO.

The bull was killed on State forest land not national forest land so there is no concern in that aspect. ECO runs a tight ship and there is no room for rule breakers or rule stretchers among our ranks! THAT IS 100% TRUTH
What the heck...
What does a thread comment from 3 years ago have anything to do with anything?


Is this post even from this forum?

No it is from a forum back east.  The thread is 42 pages long and in that thread Mr Reichert does not fare so well.  It is hard to locate it using a search engine.  I was introduced to it via someone who sent me an email.

That you resurrected after it had been dead for 3 years.
:chuckle:
Wow.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Backstraps on May 21, 2016, 04:04:38 PM
Allegedly...If there really was confusion of the regs, or special permission was trying to be obtained, why wasn't the question on the phone,"Hey, I have the raffle tag, is there any way I can get permission to shoot a branch antlered bull in 334?"
My thoughts exactly Brent! I would be interested to know if this question was asked on the phone?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: M_ray on May 21, 2016, 04:19:54 PM
He knows my number  tell him to call me so at least he can say he talked with me this year.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No one said he told you THIS year  :dunno:... I think I now know how the wdfw feels about the twist on words   :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on May 21, 2016, 04:22:15 PM
He knows my number  tell him to call me so at least he can say he talked with me this year.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No one said he told you THIS year  :dunno:... I think I now know how the wdfw feels about the twist on words   :chuckle:
He said "so he could say he talked to me "this" year, as in 2016.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: time2hunt on May 21, 2016, 04:24:10 PM
Once again he can call me and stop having his little peacock spouting off for him. I haven't spoke with Harry in over a year. As for the game dept that between Tod and his guide I'm not part of the investigation.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Kazekurt on May 21, 2016, 04:31:33 PM
Kiticasshunter, you clearly seem to know the tag holder so I have a question for you.  When it comes to this individuals hunting exploits is the size of the bull the end all?  Did he ever consider that shooting a bull that was darn near as tame as domestic livestock, well known, and oft photographed might generate  anemosity towards all hunters?  I'm very surprised he choose to burn that tag in this manner considering the opportunities that tag offered him.  Personally, I find little satisfaction in canned hunts but I recognize that not everyone is like me so I won't begrudge another hunter from enjoying the sport in any manner as long as it is legal and ethical.  As a sportsman, however, I always feel an obligation to do my best to represent hunters in a positive  light.  We, hunters, are often our own worst enemy.  When we waste game, make poor ethical decisions involving game, display kills in an undignified manner, hunt in an unsportsmanlike manner, etc we jeopardize the future of hunting.  I figure that roughly 10% of voters hunt.  Another 10% are against hunting so the future of hunting rests with the 80% of voters who don't have a dog in the fight.  I try to always consider how my actions may influence that 80% and do my best to make sure it is for the better.  Anyway, I'm just curious if any of this crossed his mind before he took that shot.  It is my prayer that all of us will do a better job of this in the future so that our grandkids will get to enjoy the same types of hunting experiences that we did. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: M_ray on May 21, 2016, 04:39:44 PM
Once again he can call me and stop having his little peacock spouting off for him. I haven't spoke with Harry in over a year. As for the game dept that between Tod and his guide I'm not part of the investigation.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Fair enough that you aren't part of the investigation ... But as far as making the story straight? I think that's between you and him. It's not my story to make straight it's yours! Harry is one of the most up standing men I've known in my life and I trust that if he tells me something then it's the truth. I've already told you he'd like to talk to you too and everyday that you drive out to the frwy you can't miss his shop so if there is a problem with what I've said it seems to me it's easily remedied by just stopping by to speak with him.   
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: time2hunt on May 21, 2016, 04:41:13 PM
Fair enough :)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: asmith on May 21, 2016, 04:59:47 PM
Shooting this elk was wrong, just like all you hunters who have permission to hunt in wheat fields and alfalfa fields.  I think yall should just stop that kind of hunting altogether, head to the nearest public forest, and give me the location of those fields so I can make sure you don't hunt there anymore ;) :chuckle: :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 21, 2016, 05:35:06 PM
Jacalope,

I was invited to participate and another thread starts


Is it true that the guy who won this tag a few years ago, the one who caused all of the controversy because he was involved in a poaching case, won the tag again this year? I thought the guidelines for being eligible for this tag were changed and this was the exact situation that brought that change about?


To which after reading page after page of things about Mr Reichert that i do not belive are fair I posted this this

I will be right up front with all of you and say that Todd Reichert has a reputation for treating his employees very well and his reputation in the community he lives in is enviable. I don't know the man, but I know of him.

I think he used exceedingly poor judgement in Ellensburg, but I don't believe him to be a bad person. I think he needs to have a "come to Jesus moment" and sit down and evaluate how he has conducted himself in the field the last decade or so and make some changes. I hope his actions in Ellensburg are going to provide the motivation for bureaucrats and politicians to start listening to the issues the rank and file sportsmen have with these Auctions & Raffles and clean up the abuses.


************
I have been participating on a very small forum that is based in PA.  It consists mainly of chuck shooters and one of their members is who directed me to that particular forum where Mr Reichert was being discussed. 

And don't anybody try to construe what I say re: abuses into a blanket statement on raffle or auction tags.

I have made my position on that topic perfectly clear.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on May 21, 2016, 09:07:41 PM
Boy I got dozens of elk, deer, and sheep pics from some nez pierce Indians in Idaho that come over every year to our beloved blues units, and hunt like its wide open, during the rut, or January when they come outta the hills, and kill em with a rifle. Velvet bucks, he really likes it when dummy's post sheep pics on the www from the asotin herd, he just rolls over and kills em, sometimes they roll right into the road... And he laughs and laughs while doing it. this guy would make guys posting here, and Tod look lie a saint..... But it doesn't even rate blurb on the radar. The simple fact is $$$$, if there wasn't so much of it involved folks woulda forgot about this long ago... Google the kill em all gang outta Longview, did they even get mentioned on here??? Or how bout old boy that killed the huge park bull on the skok tag that the kariloen bear dogs found the bones to?? Are they less important?? It sure seems so!!

PS the above mentioned native is killing waaaay over his limit, matter of fact I've been offered to go with him for a price, but never mind him, let's concentrate on the rich guy that buys all your chances...
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Skillet on May 21, 2016, 10:10:44 PM
Holy cow, lots of squirrels to chase there... so, you're complaining that this thread is still on it's original topic of one specific act committed by one specific person?  Sounds like you're carrying an awful burden with the knowledge of the Nez Perce native abuses of SE WA wildlife - would be a great thread for you to start so it could be discussed there.
And,  yes, the Kill em all boys and the park bull got their due attention on here back when they were going concerns.  I don't see how those long-resolved issues have any relevance whatsoever to this current issue regarding a branched bull shot in a GMU closed to all branched bull hunting.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: mfswallace on May 21, 2016, 10:13:41 PM
Boy I got dozens of elk, deer, and sheep pics from some nez pierce Indians in Idaho that come over every year to our beloved blues units, and hunt like its wide open, during the rut, or January when they come outta the hills, and kill em with a rifle. Velvet bucks, he really likes it when dummy's post sheep pics on the www from the asotin herd, he just rolls over and kills em, sometimes they roll right into the road... And he laughs and laughs while doing it. this guy would make guys posting here, and Tod look lie a saint..... But it doesn't even rate blurb on the radar. The simple fact is $$$$, if there wasn't so much of it involved folks woulda forgot about this long ago... Google the kill em all gang outta Longview, did they even get mentioned on here??? Or how bout old boy that killed the huge park bull on the skok tag that the kariloen bear dogs found the bones to?? Are they less important?? It sure seems so!!

PS the above mentioned native is killing waaaay over his limit, matter of fact I've been offered to go with him for a price, but never mind him, let's concentrate on the rich guy that buys all your chances...

By all means sit idly by and allow this continued abuse/violation to continue. Don't think of doing anything about it cause he has no money. U are a pos for even stating you know this goes on and that you have evidence he goes over his limit but are doing nothing about it!!!  Expose this native for his abuse and start the process of getting EVERYONE on the same page :twocents:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jmscon on May 21, 2016, 10:22:44 PM
Boy I got dozens of elk, deer, and sheep pics from some nez pierce Indians in Idaho that come over every year to our beloved blues units, and hunt like its wide open, during the rut, or January when they come outta the hills, and kill em with a rifle. Velvet bucks, he really likes it when dummy's post sheep pics on the www from the asotin herd, he just rolls over and kills em, sometimes they roll right into the road... And he laughs and laughs while doing it. this guy would make guys posting here, and Tod look lie a saint..... But it doesn't even rate blurb on the radar. The simple fact is $$$$, if there wasn't so much of it involved folks woulda forgot about this long ago... Google the kill em all gang outta Longview, did they even get mentioned on here??? Or how bout old boy that killed the huge park bull on the skok tag that the kariloen bear dogs found the bones to?? Are they less important?? It sure seems so!!

PS the above mentioned native is killing waaaay over his limit, matter of fact I've been offered to go with him for a price, but never mind him, let's concentrate on the rich guy that buys all your chances...

Standing by and letting a guy go "waaaay over his limit" and not reporting it then you are pretty much aiding and abetting. Almost as bad as the crime itself!  :tdown:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: mountainman on May 21, 2016, 10:32:04 PM
Boy I got dozens of elk, deer, and sheep pics from some nez pierce Indians in Idaho that come over every year to our beloved blues units, and hunt like its wide open, during the rut, or January when they come outta the hills, and kill em with a rifle. Velvet bucks, he really likes it when dummy's post sheep pics on the www from the asotin herd, he just rolls over and kills em, sometimes they roll right into the road... And he laughs and laughs while doing it. this guy would make guys posting here, and Tod look lie a saint..... But it doesn't even rate blurb on the radar. The simple fact is $$$$, if there wasn't so much of it involved folks woulda forgot about this long ago... Google the kill em all gang outta Longview, did they even get mentioned on here??? Or how bout old boy that killed the huge park bull on the skok tag that the kariloen bear dogs found the bones to?? Are they less important?? It sure seems so!!

PS the above mentioned native is killing waaaay over his limit, matter of fact I've been offered to go with him for a price, but never mind him, let's concentrate on the rich guy that buys all your chances...

By all means sit idly by and allow this continued abuse/violation to continue. Don't think of doing anything about it cause he has no money. U are a pos for even stating you know this goes on and that you have evidence he goes over his limit but are doing nothing about it!!!  Expose this native for his abuse and start the process of getting EVERYONE on the same page :twocents:
👆second that!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on May 21, 2016, 10:32:12 PM
Boy I got dozens of elk, deer, and sheep pics from some nez pierce Indians in Idaho that come over every year to our beloved blues units, and hunt like its wide open, during the rut, or January when they come outta the hills, and kill em with a rifle. Velvet bucks, he really likes it when dummy's post sheep pics on the www from the asotin herd, he just rolls over and kills em, sometimes they roll right into the road... And he laughs and laughs while doing it. this guy would make guys posting here, and Tod look lie a saint..... But it doesn't even rate blurb on the radar. The simple fact is $$$$, if there wasn't so much of it involved folks woulda forgot about this long ago... Google the kill em all gang outta Longview, did they even get mentioned on here??? Or how bout old boy that killed the huge park bull on the skok tag that the kariloen bear dogs found the bones to?? Are they less important?? It sure seems so!!

PS the above mentioned native is killing waaaay over his limit, matter of fact I've been offered to go with him for a price, but never mind him, let's concentrate on the rich guy that buys all your chances...

By all means sit idly by and allow this continued abuse/violation to continue. Don't think of doing anything about it cause he has no money. U are a pos for even stating you know this goes on and that you have evidence he goes over his limit but are doing nothing about it!!!  Expose this native for his abuse and start the process of getting EVERYONE on the same page :twocents:

Easy now, before you call me a *censored*, you just never know who your talking to....
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on May 21, 2016, 10:34:00 PM
Boy I got dozens of elk, deer, and sheep pics from some nez pierce Indians in Idaho that come over every year to our beloved blues units, and hunt like its wide open, during the rut, or January when they come outta the hills, and kill em with a rifle. Velvet bucks, he really likes it when dummy's post sheep pics on the www from the asotin herd, he just rolls over and kills em, sometimes they roll right into the road... And he laughs and laughs while doing it. this guy would make guys posting here, and Tod look lie a saint..... But it doesn't even rate blurb on the radar. The simple fact is $$$$, if there wasn't so much of it involved folks woulda forgot about this long ago... Google the kill em all gang outta Longview, did they even get mentioned on here??? Or how bout old boy that killed the huge park bull on the skok tag that the kariloen bear dogs found the bones to?? Are they less important?? It sure seems so!!

PS the above mentioned native is killing waaaay over his limit, matter of fact I've been offered to go with him for a price, but never mind him, let's concentrate on the rich guy that buys all your chances...

By all means sit idly by and allow this continued abuse/violation to continue. Don't think of doing anything about it cause he has no money. U are a pos for even stating you know this goes on and that you have evidence he goes over his limit but are doing nothing about it!!!  Expose this native for his abuse and start the process of getting EVERYONE on the same page :twocents:
👆second that!

Dewey go back into hiding...
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on May 21, 2016, 10:38:30 PM
Holy cow, lots of squirrels to chase there... so, you're complaining that this thread is still on it's original topic of one specific act committed by one specific person?  Sounds like you're carrying an awful burden with the knowledge of the Nez Perce native abuses of SE WA wildlife - would be a great thread for you to start so it could be discussed there.
And,  yes, the Kill em all boys and the park bull got their due attention on here back when they were going concerns.  I don't see how those long-resolved issues have any relevance whatsoever to this current issue regarding a branched bull shot in a GMU closed to all branched bull hunting.

Feel free to point out where the kill em all boys and the park bull have ate , well half the bandwidth as " Bullwinkle"...

Better yet, 1/4 the bandwidth....
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on May 21, 2016, 10:41:15 PM
Would this conversation even be happening if it was a 280" bull???? Nope
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: blackveltbowhunter on May 21, 2016, 10:48:45 PM
 :sry: 257 I gotta disagree. I beleive your comparing apples to oranges. Personally i think this would still have created a big stir if it were a smaller bull. Maybe not as big but certainly caused a ruckus. The forum has blown up since the incidents you refer to. Which will lead to much greater exposure simply due to so many more folks seeing it in one spot.  I remember the kill em all story well. But those were low profile poachers. They were under the radar, trying not to get caught. Whether TR is innocent or guilty, if he actually believes this wouldn't be a high profile case he is either naive or a liar.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on May 21, 2016, 10:55:01 PM
The aforementioned group did waaaaay more to hunting, game populations than Tod ever dreamed of. Folks didn't become so emotional about it simply cause the $$$ wasn't there and 400" bulls weren't gettin smacked. That's facts, not apples or oranges....
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on May 21, 2016, 10:56:19 PM
Kiticasshunter, you clearly seem to know the tag holder so I have a question for you.  When it comes to this individuals hunting exploits is the size of the bull the end all?  Did he ever consider that shooting a bull that was darn near as tame as domestic livestock, well known, and oft photographed might generate  anemosity towards all hunters?  I'm very surprised he choose to burn that tag in this manner considering the opportunities that tag offered him.  Personally, I find little satisfaction in canned hunts but I recognize that not everyone is like me so I won't begrudge another hunter from enjoying the sport in any manner as long as it is legal and ethical.  As a sportsman, however, I always feel an obligation to do my best to represent hunters in a positive  light.  We, hunters, are often our own worst enemy.  When we waste game, make poor ethical decisions involving game, display kills in an undignified manner, hunt in an unsportsmanlike manner, etc we jeopardize the future of hunting.  I figure that roughly 10% of voters hunt.  Another 10% are against hunting so the future of hunting rests with the 80% of voters who don't have a dog in the fight.  I try to always consider how my actions may influence that 80% and do my best to make sure it is for the better.  Anyway, I'm just curious if any of this crossed his mind before he took that shot.  It is my prayer that all of us will do a better job of this in the future so that our grandkids will get to enjoy the same types of hunting experiences that we did.

I agree with everything you said. But I'm not going to tell a man in his 70's with health  issues what a real "hunt" is. As long as it's legal everyone can make thier own decisions on what they do.when a ranking official from the game department says it's ok,  most rational people would assume it is. This bull was shot in a more wild situation than the bull the teanawayslayer guy on this forum was involved in killing last season.  That situation would make most hunters furious.  But it was legal, so I can't say baiting in a front yard is wrong....,
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 21, 2016, 11:43:36 PM
257,

I recognized early on where this was headed. 

I posted my observations.  And... I was subject of personal attack just for posting facts that I considered irrefutable with regards to what had been said re: me being a liar, re: me being opposed to Raffle/Auction hunts, and much more importantly about me having a hard-on for Mr Reichert. 

From the very beginning I have said that in my opinion the best outcome would to admit "poor judgement" and for Mr Reichert to take his lumps. 

Again, what gave anyone the notion that killing this particular elk w/in GMU 334 would end well? 

From what others have told me re: the nature of the focus of the news media, beginning early this year: "Bullwinkle" was what they were focused on, and this was not something that was being discussed here.  But, I did try to "telegraph" to those defending Mr Reichert that irrespective of charges filed, yes/no, that what Mr Reichert should be focused on is that aspect.  Did I not?   

People who lined up behind Mr Reichert flat out stated: 
a) how does anybody know the bull was not w/in 334? 
b) that the 2015 Game Regs allowed this hunt to take place 
c) That if a & b above were not in Mr Reichert's favor - Morgan Grant gave explicit permission.   

I am familiar with the game regs and posted the controlling legal authority re: the restrictions on the tag and I posted a map showing the general location the animal was taken.  It is within GMU 334.  And I posted the pages out of the 2015 Game regs w/the GMU in question highlighted.

I did not say that Mr Grant never gave explicit permission, but I said I was skeptical that the conversation went down the way it has been portrayed. 

And I clearly stated:  Just by coincidence I had followed the 2007 incident closely.  Just out of curiosity, but that knowledge raised "red flags."  This isn't his first rodeo.  I do not know why after coming across the 2007 incident I followed it, but I do follow such things. 

Going back to the earlier epic thread I got into a discussion with others re: what I referred to as "usual suspects" and was able to give a fairly accurate account of an incident that took place in Mt Rainier National Park, I remembered who, what and basically where and when and then found published validation of my recollections of what went down in the legal arena and to the absolute best of my knowledge every thing else I stated is factual re: the Argo's reputation.  I don't know why these cases fascinate me, but the simple fact is they do.

Re; the 2007 incident, there were things I clearly stated were what I recall when I could not validate what I was posting.  But if what I posted was posted as fact, I provided documentation. 

And, on top of everything else, I have clearly stated that I do not see Mr Reichert as a "bad guy," I have posted that over and over again.  Have I not?  And when posting that I gave my reasoning for accepting that conclusion.  Did I not?

Clearly, in my mind poor judgement was exercised in this case.  I keep asking: what could give anyone the notion that this was going to end well?  It just simply was not going to end well in anyone's mind, or someone, anyone, would walk me and the rest of us through a scenario in which taking this elk within GMU 334 ends well. 

Irrespective of charges having been filed/not being filed by the time I got really involved in the discussion the "bullwinkle" story was being developed.   

I was "late to the game." I was not interviewed when the news people started poking around asking questions.  I have in my possession a hand written note that was taken off a phone line that only long time friends would use to call me.  The note asked me to return a call from a reporter.  You can do the math re: how did they get that phone number.  Out of the white pages maybe, but more likely than not someone I have known since before I had a cell phone gave them that number. 

Why did they want to talk to me?  I guess that it is because I have posted what I consider as reliable info.  Of course, if you are working on a story...  you do a Lexis Nexis search. 

OK now here is what information I provided: 

I live in Tacoma, but I keep my RV in central Washington, mostly Ellensburg for the better part of five months out of the year. 

I shoot chucks, and I saw a guy in Fred Meyer who had an alfalfa grower belt buckle on and pigeon holed him and that conversation developed into a friendship. 
 Through that friendship I developed friendships with people who have had conversations I was a part of about what went down and they had no reason to exaggerate. 

No, you have already told me you have talked to anyone I know who would know first hand. 

Yes, I understand that some residents are reluctant to "go on the record." 

No, he lives in Thorp, but his relatives live right at ground zero.  I really don't know if pursuing him would provide any first hand knowledge. 

No, this Todd Reichert is not a lawyer.  He owns a shake mill off Hwy 12.  I don't know him, but I know of him.  He has a great reputation in his community. 

No, I do not know the officer personally, I but I know his brother well and have only met Morgan Grant once (that is how I knew the "who" within WDFW).  But I do know of Morgan Grant's reputation re: grey areas.  I cannot help you out on the nature of the call.   

Yes, I know Rich Mann and yes, you are right, he is by the book.  Rich Mann is very familiar to me.  When I was younger "I met up with him in the field all the time and he is strictly by the book."  What is written in the Game Regs is what Rich Mann considers "the bible."  So if someone has said Rich Mann signed off... I am skeptical.

This topic was dormant on hunting-washington, Cboom basically called me out and then proceeded to attack my reputation in an effort to discredit me. 

I shared my thoughts re: where I could go re: shadow of the doubt and the potential repercussions of pursuing that strategy and was again personally attacked.

I have gone on record saying that I do not think Mr Reichert used good judgement and then provided an opinion on why I think that any "incompetent to read and understand the Game Regs strategy" would serve Mr Reichert well and have also pointed out where I consider various strategies flawed and are not IMHO opinion the best avenue to proceed down.



 

 

 

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: blackveltbowhunter on May 21, 2016, 11:55:15 PM
The aforementioned group did waaaaay more to hunting, game populations than Tod ever dreamed of. Folks didn't become so emotional about it simply cause the $$$ wasn't there and 400" bulls weren't gettin smacked. That's facts, not apples or oranges....

Not arguing who did more damage. If you think other hunters weren't PO'd then your wrong. I was extremely PO'd!!! I hunted alot of those areas and know it affected game populations. I know plenty of hunters who were furious, none were members here. Folks outside the hunting community didn't become as emotional cuz they couldn't see it. They didn't personally lose their pet deer. Or see it get shot.  Or if they did it was unbeknownst to them. When they cant put a "face" to it, it doesn't create as big of a reaction. I remember a legal hunt a few years ago up skagit way that attracted ALOT of media attention and it was not a "big bull" or "big money" hunt. The deparment shut it down if I remember correctly.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 22, 2016, 12:40:19 AM
The aforementioned group did waaaaay more to hunting, game populations than Tod ever dreamed of. Folks didn't become so emotional about it simply cause the $$$ wasn't there and 400" bulls weren't gettin smacked. That's facts, not apples or oranges....

Not arguing who did more damage. If you think other hunters weren't PO'd then your wrong. I was extremely PO'd!!! I hunted alot of those areas and know it affected game populations. I know plenty of hunters who were furious, none were members here. Folks outside the hunting community didn't become as emotional cuz they couldn't see it. They didn't personally lose their pet deer. Or see it get shot.  Or if they did it was unbeknownst to them. When they cant put a "face" to it, it doesn't create as big of a reaction. I remember a legal hunt a few years ago up skagit way that attracted ALOT of media attention and it was not a "big bull" or "big money" hunt. The deparment shut it down if I remember correctly.

I came to this topic having already formed an opinion:  Even if legal, it was a stupid thing to do.  How could anybody get the notion this would end well? 

I don't hunt east side elk so I looked at the 2015 Game Regs, and it doesn't look good from a defense standpoint. 

So then I hear, through the grapevine, that Mr Reichert in his initial contact with WDFW had said: It was "an oversight."  So OK, it was just simple negligence.   So "self report" and say you used poor judgement by not being 100% certain.  Take the same lumps that a guy who had a "shoot through" and killed a second elk and admitted a mistake would get.  Small fine and two years.  Life if you are a Mater Hunter though. 

But then it morphed into a very convoluted story of phone calls and *censored*, we know how to  minimize the damage.  And since I was familiar with the name I am saying "self report" poor judgement and take your lumps. 

But no.  We did nothing wrong.  Yea maybe legally, but:  How could anyone get the notion that killing this particular elk within GMU 334 could possibly end well?

But then when it becomes apparent that legalities are even being considered....  "self report" and gt a PR firm on board.  Pronto. 

Lay out a scenario in which this could end well.  Charges/no charges.  Please do. 

About the time I first commented here "Bullwinkle" was already on the table.  And guess what friends, locals were pissed. 

"Self report" and just accept an isolated instance of "poor judgement."   Do what politicians do in these circumstances, "self report" and get a PR firm on board and get in front of "the story."  Then take your lumps. 

Even if eventually found not guilty, remember there is no innocent finding, this killing of "Bullwinkle" was never going to end well.  Too many residents of ground zero were thoroughly pissed about it. 

The story had been being developed before I posted a message that "telegraphed" that "Bullwinkle" was going to be the headline. 

Without a "lethal removal" order from WDFW, Bullwinkle was just hanging out in GMU 334 and would show up  for his apple soon. 

For the love of God man - what could ever give anyone the notion that this was going to end well? 

   
Title: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: klickman on May 22, 2016, 11:53:11 AM
Kiticasshunter, you clearly seem to know the tag holder so I have a question for you.  When it comes to this individuals hunting exploits is the size of the bull the end all?  Did he ever consider that shooting a bull that was darn near as tame as domestic livestock, well known, and oft photographed might generate  anemosity towards all hunters?  I'm very surprised he choose to burn that tag in this manner considering the opportunities that tag offered him.  Personally, I find little satisfaction in canned hunts but I recognize that not everyone is like me so I won't begrudge another hunter from enjoying the sport in any manner as long as it is legal and ethical.  As a sportsman, however, I always feel an obligation to do my best to represent hunters in a positive  light.  We, hunters, are often our own worst enemy.  When we waste game, make poor ethical decisions involving game, display kills in an undignified manner, hunt in an unsportsmanlike manner, etc we jeopardize the future of hunting.  I figure that roughly 10% of voters hunt.  Another 10% are against hunting so the future of hunting rests with the 80% of voters who don't have a dog in the fight.  I try to always consider how my actions may influence that 80% and do my best to make sure it is for the better.  Anyway, I'm just curious if any of this crossed his mind before he took that shot.  It is my prayer that all of us will do a better job of this in the future so that our grandkids will get to enjoy the same types of hunting experiences that we did.

I agree with everything you said. But I'm not going to tell a man in his 70's with health  issues what a real "hunt" is. As long as it's legal everyone can make thier own decisions on what they do.when a ranking official from the game department says it's ok,  most rational people would assume it is. This bull was shot in a more wild situation than the bull the teanawayslayer guy on this forum was involved in killing last season.  That situation would make most hunters furious.  But it was legal, so I can't say baiting in a front yard is wrong....,

Why do you, cboom, and --- ---
Keep throwing out the hunt Tanawayslayer was on?  There's no comparison. You are making false statements.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: BAR C3 on May 22, 2016, 01:09:21 PM
Can someone point me to the RCW or WDFW enacting legislation that grants WDFW enforcement officers the authority to suspend, temporarily or situationally, the issued regulations of the department?

Oh, and is there anything but a "he said" that mr Grant gave his permission verbally? Anything that documents his action? Recording? Text? Email? 

Assuming this permission could be documented, it seems to me it would only be evidence that the Sgt and the hunter should both be prosecuted, rather than a basis that the hunter is without fault. If a police officer gives me "permission" to steal a car, I'm pretty sure I'm still going to jail if another officer arrests me for it.  Primarily because I don't hear anyone claiming that the legality was in question, only whether or not they tried to get someone to give them extrajudicial Okee Dokee.

Feel free to correct me if that's wrong. But I have seen nothing that suggests that anyone misunderstood the unit the game was in or if it had any branch antlered season that would make it open to the tag holder.  I'd have a slightly different opinion if someone was making a reasonable claim that the unit location was unclear or that a reg was ambiguous and they needed WDFW to clear it up, haven't seen that.
If the game warden gave permission via any of the above in the authority of his position, it's all subject to public disclosure. Any Joe blow can ask for it. Won't be long and the media will be. This is going to upset the bunny huggers after being in multiple news sources today.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: M_ray on May 22, 2016, 02:07:07 PM
Kiticasshunter, you clearly seem to know the tag holder so I have a question for you.  When it comes to this individuals hunting exploits is the size of the bull the end all?  Did he ever consider that shooting a bull that was darn near as tame as domestic livestock, well known, and oft photographed might generate  anemosity towards all hunters?  I'm very surprised he choose to burn that tag in this manner considering the opportunities that tag offered him.  Personally, I find little satisfaction in canned hunts but I recognize that not everyone is like me so I won't begrudge another hunter from enjoying the sport in any manner as long as it is legal and ethical.  As a sportsman, however, I always feel an obligation to do my best to represent hunters in a positive  light.  We, hunters, are often our own worst enemy.  When we waste game, make poor ethical decisions involving game, display kills in an undignified manner, hunt in an unsportsmanlike manner, etc we jeopardize the future of hunting.  I figure that roughly 10% of voters hunt.  Another 10% are against hunting so the future of hunting rests with the 80% of voters who don't have a dog in the fight.  I try to always consider how my actions may influence that 80% and do my best to make sure it is for the better.  Anyway, I'm just curious if any of this crossed his mind before he took that shot.  It is my prayer that all of us will do a better job of this in the future so that our grandkids will get to enjoy the same types of hunting experiences that we did.

I agree with everything you said. But I'm not going to tell a man in his 70's with health  issues what a real "hunt" is. As long as it's legal everyone can make thier own decisions on what they do.when a ranking official from the game department says it's ok,  most rational people would assume it is. This bull was shot in a more wild situation than the bull the teanawayslayer guy on this forum was involved in killing last season.  That situation would make most hunters furious.  But it was legal, so I can't say baiting in a front yard is wrong....,

Why do you, cboom, and -
Keep throwing out the hunt Tanawayslayer was on?  There's  no comparison. You are making false statements.

A select few that are friends of the hunter or were party to the hunt making a poor attempt to muddy the waters.  It shows the mentality we're dealing with that can't tell the difference between a legal hunt and illegal poaching. Even while their friend is being charged and investigated they are if nothing else loyal and willing to go down with the ship!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 22, 2016, 02:56:19 PM
Kiticasshunter, you clearly seem to know the tag holder so I have a question for you.  When it comes to this individuals hunting exploits is the size of the bull the end all?  Did he ever consider that shooting a bull that was darn near as tame as domestic livestock, well known, and oft photographed might generate  anemosity towards all hunters?  I'm very surprised he choose to burn that tag in this manner considering the opportunities that tag offered him.  Personally, I find little satisfaction in canned hunts but I recognize that not everyone is like me so I won't begrudge another hunter from enjoying the sport in any manner as long as it is legal and ethical.  As a sportsman, however, I always feel an obligation to do my best to represent hunters in a positive  light.  We, hunters, are often our own worst enemy.  When we waste game, make poor ethical decisions involving game, display kills in an undignified manner, hunt in an unsportsmanlike manner, etc we jeopardize the future of hunting.  I figure that roughly 10% of voters hunt.  Another 10% are against hunting so the future of hunting rests with the 80% of voters who don't have a dog in the fight.  I try to always consider how my actions may influence that 80% and do my best to make sure it is for the better.  Anyway, I'm just curious if any of this crossed his mind before he took that shot.  It is my prayer that all of us will do a better job of this in the future so that our grandkids will get to enjoy the same types of hunting experiences that we did.

I agree with everything you said. But I'm not going to tell a man in his 70's with health  issues what a real "hunt" is. As long as it's legal everyone can make thier own decisions on what they do.when a ranking official from the game department says it's ok,  most rational people would assume it is. This bull was shot in a more wild situation than the bull the teanawayslayer guy on this forum was involved in killing last season.  That situation would make most hunters furious.  But it was legal, so I can't say baiting in a front yard is wrong....,

Why do you, cboom, and -
Keep throwing out the hunt Tanawayslayer was on?  There's no comparison. You are making false statements.

If "Bulwinkle" had wandered up into Shnebley Canyon no one here would have a problem with him getting shot. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Kazekurt on May 22, 2016, 04:03:11 PM
I know it would be impossible to enforce but in IMHO certain animals should be off limits.  The Nosler buck in Bend Oregon is a great example.  He more or less lived in the city, was  photographed by literally hundreds  of people over a  prolonged period of time , and become sort of a pet and source of pride to that community.  That buck was  ridiculous, far superior to anything I have ever killed, but I would not have shot that buck even if I legally could have.   If I didn't know his backstory, and he  crossed paths with me in a legal area  I would absolutely have shot him, but  I would never have done it  if I was aware of his notoriety before the encounter.   Certain animals sort of become "local treasures;" especially if they dwell  primarily in urban areas and killing one of those animals can unleash a boatload of problems on the hunting community.   I value my right to hunt, more than I value any particular animal so I wouldn't want to  jeopardize that even for the grandest of trophies.   Bullwinkle may  not yet have reached this type of status but he certainly was close. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: popeshawnpaul on May 22, 2016, 04:13:52 PM
IF Sgt. Grant did get or give the ok, I'm sure this will lead to others "making a call" and doing what they want.

PopeSHawn
If TR gets off because of this "call" will case law precedent be set or will it just be a first instance and it needs more actual cases to be hard and fast??

if so you can bet it will be happening more often!!

It actually happens all the time.  I have two recent cases where it happened.  Before this case I informed the GMAC and new Chief Crown this was happening, especially with the licensing division.  I advised he had a problem with employees giving bad legal advise.  I didn't feel they took my concerns seriously. 

Think of difficult to understand WAC's and RCW's that conflict with one another.  Everyone on this forum seems to think the regulations are easy to understand and who wouldn't know the law?  Well, the regulations are long and complicated and I know if a few instances where the regs, WAC, and RCW conflict.  What would be the prudent thing to do before you buy a license if you are unsure of the law?  Email or call WDFW.  Everyone that thinks this is a good ploy to go poach animals after getting faulty advise speak of relative nonsense.  I can't see someone that wants to do something illegal doing this.  The call is difficult to ascertain what was said.  If I were to give advise on the situation, I advise clients to email WDFW or get it in writing.  While it might still not be a defense, it's great stuff to have.  If they give you bad advice, is the burden on you?  Depends on the charge and whether intent is an issue.  It will not create case law because it has happened many times and there is no legal issue to appeal that a court could look to overturn. 

This is akin to a DUI case I had about a decade ago.  The trooper came upon my client on the side of the road.  He advised him to drive up to the nearest gas station about a mile away and followed him there.  He then arrested him for DUI.  Why would he advise my client to violate the law and drive drunk and then cite for DUI?  I lost that case but still think it's BS.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: M_ray on May 22, 2016, 06:07:39 PM
IF Sgt. Grant did get or give the ok, I'm sure this will lead to others "making a call" and doing what they want.

PopeSHawn
If TR gets off because of this "call" will case law precedent be set or will it just be a first instance and it needs more actual cases to be hard and fast??

if so you can bet it will be happening more often!!

It actually happens all the time.  I have two recent cases where it happened.  Before this case I informed the GMAC and new Chief Crown this was happening, especially with the licensing division.  I advised he had a problem with employees giving bad legal advise.  I didn't feel they took my concerns seriously. 

Think of difficult to understand WAC's and RCW's that conflict with one another.  Everyone on this forum seems to think the regulations are easy to understand and who wouldn't know the law?  Well, the regulations are long and complicated and I know if a few instances where the regs, WAC, and RCW conflict.  What would be the prudent thing to do before you buy a license if you are unsure of the law?  Email or call WDFW.  Everyone that thinks this is a good ploy to go poach animals after getting faulty advise speak of relative nonsense.  I can't see someone that wants to do something illegal doing this.  The call is difficult to ascertain what was said.  If I were to give advise on the situation, I advise clients to email WDFW or get it in writing.  While it might still not be a defense, it's great stuff to have.  If they give you bad advice, is the burden on you?  Depends on the charge and whether intent is an issue.  It will not create case law because it has happened many times and there is no legal issue to appeal that a court could look to overturn. 

This is akin to a DUI case I had about a decade ago.  The trooper came upon my client on the side of the road.  He advised him to drive up to the nearest gas station about a mile away and followed him there.  He then arrested him for DUI.  Why would he advise my client to violate the law and drive drunk and then cite for DUI?  I lost that case but still think it's BS.

That sounds great Shawn if the party involved didn't know where they were at? I would believe your argument if it were two guys from out of state that didn't know where they were at but these guys didn't just stumble upon some bulls in a field by chance. The fellas helping TR grew up in the valley and there wasn't a day out of 365 before this bull was shot that you couldn't come around the corner and see 5-10 cars stopped and a dozen people taking pics of these 5 bulls posing, eating apples out of their hands and the day in question there was a crowd gathering too, all well below the canal I might add.
This part of the area description is not hard to understand even for those who are not from Kittitas. So for some guys that have spent their whole lives there and another who has a boat load of experience buying Auction and Gov tags this is a very lame excuse given the high profile of these animals. They knew exactly where they were and the magnitude of the situation before them, they just wanted to kill that bull at any cost.

I believe a call was made ... but honestly? 
Was the question...
 "can I kill this bull in 334?" 
or
"can I use a rifle in 334?"

BTW given the experience of all involved they shouldn't have had to make a call in the first place cause they know the answer to these questions 

Not in a million years are you going to convince me that they didn't know where they were at AND that they needed to make a call to ask permission!!! 

 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: popeshawnpaul on May 23, 2016, 07:33:14 AM
IF Sgt. Grant did get or give the ok, I'm sure this will lead to others "making a call" and doing what they want.

PopeSHawn
If TR gets off because of this "call" will case law precedent be set or will it just be a first instance and it needs more actual cases to be hard and fast??

if so you can bet it will be happening more often!!

It actually happens all the time.  I have two recent cases where it happened.  Before this case I informed the GMAC and new Chief Crown this was happening, especially with the licensing division.  I advised he had a problem with employees giving bad legal advise.  I didn't feel they took my concerns seriously. 

Think of difficult to understand WAC's and RCW's that conflict with one another.  Everyone on this forum seems to think the regulations are easy to understand and who wouldn't know the law?  Well, the regulations are long and complicated and I know if a few instances where the regs, WAC, and RCW conflict.  What would be the prudent thing to do before you buy a license if you are unsure of the law?  Email or call WDFW.  Everyone that thinks this is a good ploy to go poach animals after getting faulty advise speak of relative nonsense.  I can't see someone that wants to do something illegal doing this.  The call is difficult to ascertain what was said.  If I were to give advise on the situation, I advise clients to email WDFW or get it in writing.  While it might still not be a defense, it's great stuff to have.  If they give you bad advice, is the burden on you?  Depends on the charge and whether intent is an issue.  It will not create case law because it has happened many times and there is no legal issue to appeal that a court could look to overturn. 

This is akin to a DUI case I had about a decade ago.  The trooper came upon my client on the side of the road.  He advised him to drive up to the nearest gas station about a mile away and followed him there.  He then arrested him for DUI.  Why would he advise my client to violate the law and drive drunk and then cite for DUI?  I lost that case but still think it's BS.

That sounds great Shawn if the party involved didn't know where they were at? I would believe your argument if

I never made an argument on anyone's behalf.  I just stated the game regs are very convoluted in many instances but I didn't cite the one relevant in this case.

The only thing I "tried to convince" you of is the regs in many instances are convoluted and the WDFW does and will give bad advise if requested from time to time. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 2MANY on May 23, 2016, 07:34:12 AM
"I know it would be impossible to enforce but in IMHO certain animals should be off limits.  The Nosler buck in Bend Oregon is a great example.  He more or less lived in the city, was  photographed by literally hundreds  of people over a  prolonged period of time , and become sort of a pet and source of pride to that community.  That buck was  ridiculous, far superior to anything I have ever killed, but I would not have shot that buck even if I legally could have.   If I didn't know his backstory, and he  crossed paths with me in a legal area  I would absolutely have shot him, but  I would never have done it  if I was aware of his notoriety before the encounter.   Certain animals sort of become "local treasures;" especially if they dwell  primarily in urban areas and killing one of those animals can unleash a boatload of problems on the hunting community.   I value my right to hunt, more than I value any particular animal so I wouldn't want to  jeopardize that even for the grandest of trophies.   Bullwinkle may  not yet have reached this type of status but he certainly was close."


Very well said and I agree 100%.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on May 23, 2016, 07:53:25 AM
With Pope's warnings and now this case I think they need to follow up with a policy that states only certain employment positions are authorized to give information to the public. So in the future Joe schmo employee has to refer anybody calling in to another person with more knowledge of the regs.

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Odell on May 23, 2016, 08:28:19 AM
The unit is closed to branch bull hunting.

It is the individuals responsibility to know the law.

Those are facts.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 2MANY on May 23, 2016, 08:55:22 AM
State agencies are full of people that couldn't make it on the private side.
They suckle the government's tut until retirement and are protected by the government's inability to fire them.
Obviously they screwed up when they were called and asked a question.
Ask em where the break room is located and you will get a correct answer.
Ask them a hunting or fishing question and they will transfer you to a guy's answering machine.
When he, she, or it gets back from a sick leave day spent fishing the Cowlitz he, she, or it just might call you back even.

The entire agency should be sub contracted out so there could be some level of financial accountability. .
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Magnum_Willys on May 23, 2016, 09:00:50 AM
The unit is closed to branch bull hunting.

It is the individuals responsibility to know the law.

Those are facts.

These facts are undisputed
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 2MANY on May 23, 2016, 09:02:41 AM
Everybody cut Footloose.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Coastal_native on May 23, 2016, 10:56:20 AM
This might be a more appropriate screen grab from that movie.  I've lost interest in the truth, at this point.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on May 23, 2016, 11:55:41 AM
What a mess.  :bash:

If they would have just gone after a different bull.

In the end the only people that are going to be happy are the lawyers.  What a shame.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Odell on May 23, 2016, 12:36:41 PM
What a mess.  :bash:

If they would have just gone after a different bull.

In the end the only people that are going to be happy are the lawyers.  What a shame.

No kidding. If it was legal I would shoot a buck or bull in an alfalfa field any day of the week. But with that tag, the whole point is the opportunity it gives you. Go chase one!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 2MANY on May 23, 2016, 12:45:32 PM
I thought I previously read he is by definition a handicapped hunter???

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on May 23, 2016, 12:51:37 PM
What a mess.  :bash:

If they would have just gone after a different bull.

In the end the only people that are going to be happy are the lawyers.  What a shame.

No kidding. If it was legal I would shoot a buck or bull in an alfalfa field any day of the week. But with that tag, the whole point is the opportunity it gives you. Go chase one!
I would do the same with or without the tag.  If it would have been in an alfalfa field that was normally open I would have probably done the same as him.  People would have been upset still but it would have been within the rules.  Those people could then change the rules if they didn't like them.

This hunt seems to have gone down the opposite way, change the rules to make the hunt legal and that doesn't sit well with people.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: HntnFsh on May 23, 2016, 01:21:31 PM
I thought I previously read he is by definition a handicapped hunter???

If so it would have no bearing on this case.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 2MANY on May 23, 2016, 02:24:36 PM
Lots of things seem to have no bearing in this case or the thread.

I only brought it up because it may have had bearing on him just going and chasing one like the previous poster implied he could do.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Russ McDonald on May 23, 2016, 05:02:22 PM
A friendly reminder please no profanity or intended profanity that includes trying to get around the censor by abbreviating, hyphenating, or substituting letters and numbers.  Thanks
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: REHJWA on May 23, 2016, 05:10:59 PM
If he was so set on this bull you would think he could have gotten a landowner damage permit???
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: HntnFsh on May 23, 2016, 05:18:47 PM
If he was so set on this bull you would think he could have gotten a landowner damage permit???

I doubt it.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Woodchuck on May 23, 2016, 05:29:12 PM
If he was so set on this bull you would think he could have gotten a landowner damage permit???
Not likely for a bull.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on May 23, 2016, 05:42:56 PM
If he was so set on this bull you would think he could have gotten a landowner damage permit???
Not in a GMU closed to the hunting of branch antlered bulls.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on May 23, 2016, 06:20:38 PM
If he was so set on this bull you would think he could have gotten a landowner damage permit???
Not in a GMU closed to the hunting of branch antlered bulls.


Wait.....   Was this bull killed in a GMU that's closed to the hunting of branch antlered bulls?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on May 23, 2016, 06:27:50 PM
If he was so set on this bull you would think he could have gotten a landowner damage permit???
Not in a GMU closed to the hunting of branch antlered bulls.


Wait.....   Was this bull killed in a GMU that's closed to the hunting of branch antlered bulls?

Yes.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: DaveMonti on May 23, 2016, 06:56:21 PM

Wait.....   Was this bull killed in a GMU that's closed to the hunting of branch antlered bulls?

WHAT????  Now that changes EVERYTHING...
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Odell on May 23, 2016, 07:12:27 PM
Lots of things seem to have no bearing in this case or the thread.

I only brought it up because it may have had bearing on him just going and chasing one like the previous poster implied he could do.

The guy hunts multiple states and killed a bull in the blues. He could chase one from a quad where legal, from horseback if able. I'm not saying he has to hump down a canyon and carry an elk out on his back but you would think with that tag you want to go after a bull that's at least off the highway. He's killed so many mashers I can't see what the purpose of killing this one was.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Coastal_native on May 23, 2016, 07:34:47 PM
Lots of things seem to have no bearing in this case or the thread.

I only brought it up because it may have had bearing on him just going and chasing one like the previous poster implied he could do.

He's killed so many mashers I can't see what the purpose of killing this one was.

More is better?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: h20hunter on May 23, 2016, 07:36:13 PM
If he was so set on this bull you would think he could have gotten a landowner damage permit???
Not in a GMU closed to the hunting of branch antlered bulls.


Wait.....   Was this bull killed in a GMU that's closed to the hunting of branch antlered bulls?

Best post on this topic I've read in a long time.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 23, 2016, 07:41:42 PM
Lots of things seem to have no bearing in this case or the thread.

I only brought it up because it may have had bearing on him just going and chasing one like the previous poster implied he could do.

The guy hunts multiple states and killed a bull in the blues. He could chase one from a quad where legal, from horseback if able. I'm not saying he has to hump down a canyon and carry an elk out on his back but you would think with that tag you want to go after a bull that's at least off the highway. He's killed so many mashers I can't see what the purpose of killing this one was.


He could be suffering from Obsessive Compulsive Disorder.

It may well be that he just goes coo coo for coco puffs and simply is unable to control himself with an elk tag and a rifle in his hands.
   
 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on May 23, 2016, 08:10:10 PM

Wait.....   Was this bull killed in a GMU that's closed to the hunting of branch antlered bulls?

WHAT????  Now that changes EVERYTHING...
I hadn't stopped laughing from Dan-O's post when I got your yours.

You guys are a deadly one two punch.  Thanks for bringing some humor to this train wreck.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Alchase on May 24, 2016, 09:35:36 AM

Wait.....   Was this bull killed in a GMU that's closed to the hunting of branch antlered bulls?

WHAT????  Now that changes EVERYTHING...
I hadn't stopped laughing from Dan-O's post when I got your yours.

You guys are a deadly one two punch.  Thanks for bringing some humor to this train wreck.

I think they were serious........... :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on May 24, 2016, 04:05:51 PM
If he was so set on this bull you would think he could have gotten a landowner damage permit???
Not in a GMU closed to the hunting of branch antlered bulls.


Wait.....   Was this bull killed in a GMU that's closed to the hunting of branch antlered bulls?

Yes.

Its a perspective thing. What's illegal to one is legal to another. :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on May 24, 2016, 04:07:30 PM

Wait.....   Was this bull killed in a GMU that's closed to the hunting of branch antlered bulls?

WHAT????  Now that changes EVERYTHING...
I hadn't stopped laughing from Dan-O's post when I got your yours.

You guys are a deadly one two punch.  Thanks for bringing some humor to this train wreck.

I think they were serious........... :chuckle:

Of course he is, he's a member of the YAKASESSFGG...or whatever we call ourselves these days >:(
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on May 24, 2016, 06:39:42 PM

Wait.....   Was this bull killed in a GMU that's closed to the hunting of branch antlered bulls?

WHAT????  Now that changes EVERYTHING...
I hadn't stopped laughing from Dan-O's post when I got your yours.

You guys are a deadly one two punch.  Thanks for bringing some humor to this train wreck.

I think they were serious........... :chuckle:

Of course he is, he's a member of the YAKASESSFGG...or whatever we call ourselves these days >:(

 :yeah: :yeah: >:( >:( >:( >:(
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: dscubame on May 24, 2016, 08:39:14 PM
What ever did happen to the YAR good ole boys clan?  Did it go Secret Society?  Underground only to be spoke of in myth and legend?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: DaveMonti on May 24, 2016, 09:47:44 PM
It went the way of the recurve compound bow.  Disappeared altogether.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on May 24, 2016, 09:56:11 PM

Wait.....   Was this bull killed in a GMU that's closed to the hunting of branch antlered bulls?

WHAT????  Now that changes EVERYTHING...
I hadn't stopped laughing from Dan-O's post when I got your yours.

You guys are a deadly one two punch.  Thanks for bringing some humor to this train wreck.

I think they were serious........... :chuckle:

Of course he is, he's a member of the YAKASESSFGG...or whatever we call ourselves these days >:(

 :yeah: :yeah: >:( >:( >:( >:(


Well then...... are we sure it was really a branch antlered bull?   
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 2MANY on May 25, 2016, 07:22:34 AM
It's not his fault the elk died.

Guns kill elk not people.

If guns were outlawed this elk would still be making a living off the rancher's alfalfa and tearing down the their fences.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: smittyJ on May 25, 2016, 07:40:59 AM

Wait.....   Was this bull killed in a GMU that's closed to the hunting of branch antlered bulls?

It "identified" as a True Spike!

WHAT????  Now that changes EVERYTHING...
I hadn't stopped laughing from Dan-O's post when I got your yours.

You guys are a deadly one two punch.  Thanks for bringing some humor to this train wreck.

I think they were serious........... :chuckle:

Of course he is, he's a member of the YAKASESSFGG...or whatever we call ourselves these days >:(

 :yeah: :yeah: >:( >:( >:( >:(


Well then...... are we sure it was really a branch antlered bull?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on May 25, 2016, 07:51:05 AM
It went the way of the recurve compound bow.  Disappeared altogether.

The YAR...I will neither confirm nor deny the existence of such an organization. Thank you that will be all, no questions (stepping off my podium). 8)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on May 25, 2016, 07:52:39 AM

Wait.....   Was this bull killed in a GMU that's closed to the hunting of branch antlered bulls?

WHAT????  Now that changes EVERYTHING...
I hadn't stopped laughing from Dan-O's post when I got your yours.

You guys are a deadly one two punch.  Thanks for bringing some humor to this train wreck.

I think they were serious........... :chuckle:

Of course he is, he's a member of the YAKASESSFGG...or whatever we call ourselves these days >:(

 :yeah: :yeah: >:( >:( >:( >:(


Well then...... are we sure it was really a branch antlered bull?

It was a world record spike that self - identified as a branched bull, therefore legal.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on May 25, 2016, 07:55:41 AM
 :o disappeared as I went to quote...must've been that super - secret - black organization - that doesn't exist-3 letter agency....... :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on May 25, 2016, 07:55:56 AM
One last time, then this thread will go the way of the compound recurve bow. It'll disappear all together. This is the last warning regarding this subject.


Posting the personal information of other members is not allowed.  Don't do it. You'll get banned. It will get nuked.
Don't post insults or personal attacks.
Don't post innacurate information. Anything that is not a true statement regarding the topic of this thread and/or anything directly related to it will get nuked.



Posting the personal information of other members is not allowed. Don't do it. You'll get banned
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on May 25, 2016, 08:09:54 AM
As I was going to add, I don't think he cared. I'm not sticking up for or defending him, just stating what I believe to be the honest truth. He knew there might be some controversy and just didn't care.

Also, I think someone confirmed on here that the 2007 incident resulted in a conviction for lying and not any game related convictions so this in a sense would be his 1st offense, if it holds up.

He's obviously got some extra money to spend and I don't think he really cares what people so why do people insist on continuing to state he should care or do something to show remorse or give back if he really cared...that's just wishful thinking.

He's a self - made type of man and if he didn't care in the past what's left to expect a change now?

I'm sure if the alleged approved authorization from wdfw pans out he's not going to care and go out and find some more monsters. If not, I'm sure he's going to drag this out as long as he can, possibly another couple of years just to continue buying up the exclusive tags he's used to and not bat an eye.

Like I said, face some reality and get over the idea he's going to do something to feel good for everybody else.

I'm not defending or supporting him, just stating the obvious.  It's just crazy watching this train wreck continue as it doesn't matter what we say or think, it matters what actually happens in court and he's convicted of. :dunno:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: h20hunter on May 25, 2016, 08:17:34 AM
Good points Plat. I think you are correct that he simply may not give a hoot. IF he did get permission,  right or wrong, this whole mess will simply go away and left to be argued on Internet forums.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on May 25, 2016, 08:21:12 AM
Dare I ask.......

What if he did make the calls and get the permission from WDFW to shoot this bull? Who would be the bad guy at that point? This has been burning in the back of my head since the beginning of this hot mess.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Woodchuck on May 25, 2016, 08:24:11 AM
 :yeah:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on May 25, 2016, 08:36:53 AM
Dare I ask.......

What if he did make the calls and get the permission from WDFW to shoot this bull? Who would be the bad guy at that point? This has been burning in the back of my head since the beginning of this hot mess.

As the incident occurred I heard from 2 people in the know and so far one of those people's story is starting to take shape and reveal itself to be accurate.

Right or wrong ethically doesn't matter in this incident. Legal vs illegal and what a jury or judge thinks is what's going to matter. If permission was given and the person(s) that gave that permission stick to their words then whether it was actually legal by the WAC or RCW isn't going to matter because the judge/jury are going to be swayed by the official (s) that authorized it.

Pope's posted already that it doesn't matter if they had the authority by law or not, with the officer telling an inebriated person to drive further down the road. Pope clearly stated he pushed that issue and it didn't work out for his client. The officer didn't have the authority per WAC/RCW to make that call but he did.

We get it, or at least I do, they don't have the authority by law but If it turns out authority was given then he's walking.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Ghost Hunter on May 25, 2016, 08:44:12 AM
Dare I ask.......

What if he did make the calls and get the permission from WDFW to shoot this bull? Who would be the bad guy at that point? This has been burning in the back of my head since the beginning of this hot mess.

We get it, or at least I do, they don't have the authority by law but If it turns out authority was given then he's walking.

He walks WDFW might need an unlisted information phone number :dunno: :rolleyes:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bearpaw on May 25, 2016, 09:48:20 AM
This applies to several members on both sides of these Reichert topics, you will know in what manner this message applies to you.

Please keep your facts straight and follow the forum rules. H-W is an internet service provider, members publish topics that they wish to discuss and other members publish comments regarding their own thoughts on various topics. Courts have ruled that publishers (members) on internet service providers are responsible for their own comments. Hunting-Washington forum (which I own) attempts to allow as open family-friendly discussion as possible and has a neutral position on the Reichert issue. I don't know what the facts of the case are but I have made several statements in numerous Reichert topics asking members to only post factual information on this issue, yet we have had to remove numerous individual comments and even whole topics about this issue that are obviously speculative and potentially untruthful or slanderous, or that contain names or personal info about members, or due to name calling (all of which is not allowed).

In return for trying to be fair to all sides I have been threatened with law suits or criticized from both sides. A few members who continue to ignore the forum rules and or post unsubstantiated info are about one step away from being banned from this forum as myself and several other moderators are tired of trying babysit certain members posting in these topics. If you wish to remain on this forum please follow the rules and don't post unproven accusations that are false or defamatory, or personal information, or you will be banned from this forum. Please read the forum rules again, read the underlined portion twice:

http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,163263.0.html

Quote
Forum Rules & Policies
This forum is intended to be a family friendly and helpful venue for hunters, fishers, trappers, and other sportsmen. Unauthorized advertising is not allowed, contact forum management for available advertising opportunities. Forum management reserves the right to remove any member who violates the forum rules/policies or who in their opinion is actively working against the common interests of hunters or other sportsmen. This is a privately owned site with the following rules and policies:

You agree, through your use of this forum, that you will not post any material which is false, defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, name calling, belittling, threatening, negativity in success topics, unproven accusations, obscene, profanity or intended profanity, sexually oriented, adult material, invasive of a person's privacy, or in violation of any International, State, or United States Federal law. You also agree not to post any copyrighted material unless you own the copyright or you have written consent from the owner of the copyrighted material. You further agree that you are granting Hunting-Washington perpetual unrestricted use of your material. Spam, flooding, unauthorized advertising, chain letters, pyramid schemes, and solicitations are not allowed on this forum.

Note that it is impossible for the staff or the owners of this forum to confirm the validity of material. Please remember that we do not actively monitor all posted material, and as such, are not responsible for the content contained within. We do not warrant the accuracy, authenticity, completeness, or usefulness of any information presented. The posted material expresses the views of the author, and not necessarily the views of this forum, its staff, its subsidiaries, or this forum's owner. Anyone who feels that posted material or a private message is objectionable is encouraged to notify an administrator or moderator of this forum immediately. The staff and the owner of this forum reserve the right to edit or remove any content, if they determine that removal is needed it is a manual process so removal or editing may not occur immediately. This policy applies to member profile information as well.

You remain solely responsible for the content that you post. Furthermore, you agree to indemnify and hold harmless the owners of this forum, any related websites to this forum, its staff, and its subsidiaries. The owners of this forum reserve the right to reveal your identity (or any other related information collected on this service) in the event of a formal complaint, legal, or lawful action arising from your use of this forum.

You have the ability, as you register, to choose a username under which you may post your material, only appropriate usernames will be allowed. You may only have one username and any change to your username requires preapproval by an administrator. With this user account you are about to register, you agree to never give your password out to another person except an administrator, for your protection and for validity reasons. You also agree to NEVER use another person's account for any reason.  We also HIGHLY recommend you use a complex and unique password for your account, to prevent account theft.

After you register and login to this forum, you will be able to fill out a detailed profile and post content on the forum. It is your responsibility to present acceptable information and material. Your IP address is recorded and may be used in the event that you need to be banned from this forum or your ISP contacted due to a major violation of this agreement.

Also note that the software places a cookie, a text file containing bits of information (such as your username and password), in your browser's cache. This is ONLY used to keep you logged in/out. The software does not collect or send any other form of information to your computer.

All forum rules and policies are subject to administrative discretion and may be changed without notice at any time.

Thank You,
Forum Management Team
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on May 25, 2016, 10:06:36 AM

Also, I think someone confirmed on here that the 2007 incident resulted in a conviction for lying and not any game related convictions so this in a sense would be his 1st offense, if it holds up.

 As a result of a plea, any good attorney will get his client a lesser charge in the end, than the one they are originally facing.

 Don't think for a second a judge does not have all the facts/history in front of them while hearing a case. :twocents:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on May 25, 2016, 10:31:51 AM
Dare I ask.......

What if he did make the calls and get the permission from WDFW to shoot this bull? Who would be the bad guy at that point? This has been burning in the back of my head since the beginning of this hot mess.

As the incident occurred I heard from 2 people in the know and so far one of those people's story is starting to take shape and reveal itself to be accurate.

Right or wrong ethically doesn't matter in this incident. Legal vs illegal and what a jury or judge thinks is what's going to matter. If permission was given and the person(s) that gave that permission stick to their words then whether it was actually legal by the WAC or RCW isn't going to matter because the judge/jury are going to be swayed by the official (s) that authorized it.

Pope's posted already that it doesn't matter if they had the authority by law or not, with the officer telling an inebriated person to drive further down the road. Pope clearly stated he pushed that issue and it didn't work out for his client. The officer didn't have the authority per WAC/RCW to make that call but he did.

We get it, or at least I do, they don't have the authority by law but If it turns out authority was given then he's walking.



Easy now platt, common sense will getcha flamed!!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on May 25, 2016, 10:42:07 AM
Dare I ask.......

What if he did make the calls and get the permission from WDFW to shoot this bull? Who would be the bad guy at that point? This has been burning in the back of my head since the beginning of this hot mess.

We get it, or at least I do, they don't have the authority by law but If it turns out authority was given then he's walking.

He walks WDFW might need an unlisted information phone number :dunno: :rolleyes:
Great question, reply and comment. All three of you nailed it.

If that is what happened focus of anger over this incident will shift to the WDFW.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on May 25, 2016, 10:53:39 AM
Dare I ask.......

What if he did make the calls and get the permission from WDFW to shoot this bull? Who would be the bad guy at that point? This has been burning in the back of my head since the beginning of this hot mess.

We get it, or at least I do, they don't have the authority by law but If it turns out authority was given then he's walking.

He walks WDFW might need an unlisted information phone number :dunno: :rolleyes:
Great question, reply and comment. All three of you nailed it.

If that is what happened focus of anger over this incident will shift to the WDFW.

My prediction if this goes down. You'll still have the crowd who remains pissed off at Mr. Reichert for even calling for permission in the first place.
(stand by. I'm putting on my flame retardant suit)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on May 25, 2016, 12:07:53 PM

Also, I think someone confirmed on here that the 2007 incident resulted in a conviction for lying and not any game related convictions so this in a sense would be his 1st offense, if it holds up.

 As a result of a plee, any good attorney will get his client a lesser charge in the end, than the one they are originally facing.

 Don't think for a second a judge does not have all the facts/history in front of them while hearing a case. :twocents:

I know, I've been on the side of the enforcement side of the law for quite awhile. It doesn't matter, seriously, as I've witnessed 1st hand in tribal, municipal, district and federal court if you weren't convicted on it then it doesn't hold much bearing. The judge will see it, read it, review it and at least majority of the time that I witnessed they didn't even bring it up.

It comes back to what you were convicted of and had the strongest case on. I've seen people with multiple offenses that were plead down and the prosecutor pushed saying they plead and the judge stated numerous times that if in fact that we're the case now, then why not all those times as well, if you seen a pattern why not push for the tougher sentences, why agree to a plea?

Like I said, reality. I've read for over, what,  70 pages and it's been a lot of facts and fiction and wishful thinking. Honestly, I don't see this as being more than a simple slap on the hand and in the end the pet will still have been a pet which is now dead and forgotten just like Cecil and next season there will be another animal for everyone to focus on.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on May 25, 2016, 12:36:31 PM
Dare I ask.......

What if he did make the calls and get the permission from WDFW to shoot this bull? Who would be the bad guy at that point? This has been burning in the back of my head since the beginning of this hot mess.

We get it, or at least I do, they don't have the authority by law but If it turns out authority was given then he's walking.

He walks WDFW might need an unlisted information phone number :dunno: :rolleyes:
Great question, reply and comment. All three of you nailed it.

If that is what happened focus of anger over this incident will shift to the WDFW.

My prediction if this goes down. You'll still have the crowd who remains pissed off at Mr. Reichert for even calling for permission in the first place.
(stand by. I'm putting on my flame retardant suit)
For sure, nobody wins in this one, it is an absolute mess.  There will be plenty of blame to go around depending on what angle you are looking at it from.  In reality there are a ton of people to blame.  Todd, the guides, the landowner, WDFW, people who turned this animal into pretty much a pet, the list can go on and on.

The worst part is no matter where you put the blame it is a black eye for hunting in general.

Once that elk was targeted nothing good was going to come of it.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on May 25, 2016, 02:31:57 PM
I'd say, once those bulls were domesticated they were doomed. If not Mr Reichert,  then someone else probably would've. Let wild be wild.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on May 25, 2016, 02:42:55 PM
I'd say, once those bulls were domesticated they were doomed. If not Mr Reichert,  then someone else probably would've. Let wild be wild.
It's like deja vu all over again.  I think you said this a couple of months ago in this thread or another one on the same topic.  You're just not going to budge are you? Insert sarcasm emoji here.  I agree with you 100%, they were doomed and something would have happened to them anyway.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Legacy on May 25, 2016, 03:05:39 PM
To me Reichert's guilt or innocence is probably not as worrisome as what impact his taking of this bull (which by all accounts appears to have been a "pet", that had a name and that was fed regularly alfalfa hay in a fenced area by local kids) could have on legitimate hunters and hunting in general. Most of what I've read indicates this trophy was killed without any remote semblance of "fair chase" or any traditional notions of fair play or ethical hunting. So far, news of this episode has been kept fairly local and I'm hoping we don't end up with another "Cecil" incident once some anti-hunter individual or group uses social media to feign shock and outrage, which then spreads like wildfire and gets shared by others who chime in and paint all hunters as elitist and wealthy mass killers who care little for wildlife and animal rights. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on May 25, 2016, 03:19:16 PM
To me Reichert's guilt or innocence is probably not as worrisome as what impact his taking of this bull (which by all accounts appears to have been a "pet", that had a name and that was fed regularly alfalfa hay in a fenced area by local kids) could have on legitimate hunters and hunting in general. Most of what I've read indicates this trophy was killed without any remote semblance of "fair chase" or any traditional notions of fair play or ethical hunting. So far, news of this episode has been kept fairly local and I'm hoping we don't end up with another "Cecil" incident once some anti-hunter individual or group uses social media to feign shock and outrage, which then spreads like wildfire and gets shared by others who chime in and paint all hunters as elitist and wealthy mass killers who care little for wildlife and animal rights.

 Well said.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Miles on May 25, 2016, 03:30:15 PM
Bullwinkle sounds more like a moose name anyway...
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on May 25, 2016, 03:31:29 PM
Bullwinkle sounds more like a moose name anyway...
It doesn't make sense, does it?

I thought his name was Ranger.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bearpaw on May 25, 2016, 03:53:59 PM
To me Reichert's guilt or innocence is probably not as worrisome as what impact his taking of this bull (which by all accounts appears to have been a "pet", that had a name and that was fed regularly alfalfa hay in a fenced area by local kids) could have on legitimate hunters and hunting in general. Most of what I've read indicates this trophy was killed without any remote semblance of "fair chase" or any traditional notions of fair play or ethical hunting. So far, news of this episode has been kept fairly local and I'm hoping we don't end up with another "Cecil" incident once some anti-hunter individual or group uses social media to feign shock and outrage, which then spreads like wildfire and gets shared by others who chime in and paint all hunters as elitist and wealthy mass killers who care little for wildlife and animal rights.

 Well said.

I agree, it's also worrisome that some hunters themselves have made this such a big deal that it will harm hunters in the end.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on May 25, 2016, 04:22:35 PM
To me Reichert's guilt or innocence is probably not as worrisome as what impact his taking of this bull (which by all accounts appears to have been a "pet", that had a name and that was fed regularly alfalfa hay in a fenced area by local kids) could have on legitimate hunters and hunting in general. Most of what I've read indicates this trophy was killed without any remote semblance of "fair chase" or any traditional notions of fair play or ethical hunting. So far, news of this episode has been kept fairly local and I'm hoping we don't end up with another "Cecil" incident once some anti-hunter individual or group uses social media to feign shock and outrage, which then spreads like wildfire and gets shared by others who chime in and paint all hunters as elitist and wealthy mass killers who care little for wildlife and animal rights.

 Well said.

I agree, it's also worrisome that some hunters themselves have made this such a big deal that it will harm hunters in the end.

Hunters made this a circus. I get it, he was in the wrong for shooting a domestic animal, but by blowing this outta proportion we may have made things worse. Who knows at this point. Hopefully larry, curly, Moe & rocky (the other pet bulls) learn from T his and stay away.

Though I heard wdfw bungled an attempted tranquilizing and had to put 1 of them down. Another waste of resources.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bobcat on May 25, 2016, 04:31:10 PM
The main issue isn't how this bull elk was "domesticated" but that the elk tag the hunter used was not valid in the unit.

It's the same as if a guy with an eastern tag killed a bull in western Washington. It's illegal. Period. It's not that complicated.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: full choke on May 25, 2016, 04:38:22 PM
To me Reichert's guilt or innocence is probably not as worrisome as what impact his taking of this bull (which by all accounts appears to have been a "pet", that had a name and that was fed regularly alfalfa hay in a fenced area by local kids) could have on legitimate hunters and hunting in general. Most of what I've read indicates this trophy was killed without any remote semblance of "fair chase" or any traditional notions of fair play or ethical hunting. So far, news of this episode has been kept fairly local and I'm hoping we don't end up with another "Cecil" incident once some anti-hunter individual or group uses social media to feign shock and outrage, which then spreads like wildfire and gets shared by others who chime in and paint all hunters as elitist and wealthy mass killers who care little for wildlife and animal rights.

 Well said.

I agree, it's also worrisome that some hunters themselves have made this such a big deal that it will harm hunters in the end.

Hunters made this a circus. I get it, he was in the wrong for shooting a domestic animal, but by blowing this outta proportion we may have made things worse. Who knows at this point. Hopefully larry, curly, Moe & rocky (the other pet bulls) learn from T his and stay away.

Though I heard wdfw bungled an attempted tranquilizing and had to put 1 of them down. Another waste of resources.

No. He was wrong for shooting an animal in a closed unit. Quit trying to change the subject...
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 724wd on May 25, 2016, 04:48:30 PM
The main issue isn't how this bull elk was "domesticated" but that the elk tag the hunter used was not valid in the unit.

It's the same as if a guy with an eastern tag killed a bull in western Washington. It's illegal. Period. It's not that complicated.

 :yeah:  i couldn't give two poops about how the bull killed.  the bull was in a unit not open.  He should be held accountable for that, regardless of the name of the bull.  Also, the "calling WDFW" shouldn't be a defense, as the rules were already set.  The unit was closed to taking branch bulls.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on May 25, 2016, 05:16:35 PM
I agree with Plat.  And yes one of the other bulls in this group was wasted after being tangled.  They are wild animals and should be hunted, period. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on May 25, 2016, 05:24:19 PM
I know as I stated many times I know it's a closed unit. I'm not disputing that as that was proven from the beginning.  Read my previous posts today and you'll understand what I'm stating bobcat, full choke and 724.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on May 25, 2016, 05:48:48 PM
Wait........     was this bull shot with a full choke???
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 25, 2016, 06:11:01 PM
The main issue isn't how this bull elk was "domesticated" but that the elk tag the hunter used was not valid in the unit.

It's the same as if a guy with an eastern tag killed a bull in western Washington. It's illegal. Period. It's not that complicated.

There is no difference between him killing a Roosevelt on the coast with that tag and killing a bull in GMU 334.  The tag was no more valid for the latter than it was for the former.  If this defense is allowed to stand it throws the door wide open in the future. 

In order to get to a conclusion that everything was on the up and up, assumptions have to be accepted that demand a series of logical leaps and coincidences to all come together.  While that would not make it impossible it certainly complicates accepting that version of events.


Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on May 25, 2016, 07:05:58 PM
There is a big difference, it's actually happened here on the west side.  Errors were made, no charges were filed, but then again there wasn't the court of Huntwa to publicly crucify someone and assure their guilt.  I wonder if the charges get dropped off there won't be a civil suit filed against the wdfw and the individuals who granted permission.  I would think some of things posted on this forum would cause parties to settle and not want to go to trial.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: cbond3318 on May 25, 2016, 07:28:30 PM
I don't suppose routine calls to WDFW are recorded for training purposes ?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on May 25, 2016, 09:16:52 PM
I don't suppose routine calls to WDFW are recorded for training purposes ?

  And without a recording it's he said she said. If Tod Reichert is going to rely on his "we got permission over the phone" defense, the burden of proof is on him.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on May 25, 2016, 09:37:32 PM
There is a big difference, it's actually happened here on the west side.  Errors were made, no charges were filed, but then again there wasn't the court of Huntwa to publicly crucify someone and assure their guilt.  I wonder if the charges get dropped off there won't be a civil suit filed against the wdfw and the individuals who granted permission.  I would think some of things posted on this forum would cause parties to settle and not want to go to trial.

Ahhhh th he good old hunt wa court. Remember the big bull that got poached in the green river watershed? Or was it the cedar river watershed? Or was it washougal? This place is and people are funny for sure....

Oops, remember when Agnew killed the non typical record, flew in and out killed the same day flying??? Blah blah blah..... the list goes on and on...
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on May 25, 2016, 09:56:22 PM
There is a big difference, it's actually happened here on the west side.  Errors were made, no charges were filed, but then again there wasn't the court of Huntwa to publicly crucify someone and assure their guilt.  I wonder if the charges get dropped off there won't be a civil suit filed against the wdfw and the individuals who granted permission.  I would think some of things posted on this forum would cause parties to settle and not want to go to trial.

Ahhhh th he good old hunt wa court. Remember the big bull that got poached in the green river watershed? Or was it the cedar river watershed? Or was it washougal? This place is and people are funny for sure....

Oops, remember when Agnew killed the non typical record, flew in and out killed the same day flying??? Blah blah blah..... the list goes on and on...


It wasn't in the 'Shoug!!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on May 25, 2016, 10:14:00 PM
I woulda much rather seen "Bullwinkle" ironed out on I-90 by a semi!!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: DaveMonti on May 25, 2016, 10:35:03 PM
Wait........     was this bull shot with a full choke???

Let me clarify.  The bull died by choking on alfalfa. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Landowner on May 25, 2016, 11:33:22 PM
Under the subject of pot stirring, I haven't seen any criticism of the landowner who helped sentence a near tame elk to death.

Carry on.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on May 26, 2016, 12:10:26 AM
There is a big difference, it's actually happened here on the west side.  Errors were made, no charges were filed, but then again there wasn't the court of Huntwa to publicly crucify someone and assure their guilt.  I wonder if the charges get dropped off there won't be a civil suit filed against the wdfw and the individuals who granted permission.  I would think some of things posted on this forum would cause parties to settle and not want to go to trial.

remember when Agnew killed the non typical record, flew in and out killed the same day flying??? Blah blah blah..... the list goes on and on...

 A non issue and completely irrelevant to this case, let's not get it twisted and stick to the facts.
 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 26, 2016, 05:59:38 AM
Charges filed/charges not filed, Guilty plea or verdict/acquittal, can someone, anyone, please lay out a scenario in which this ever would have ended well? 

I simply cannot get my mind around what could have given anyone the notion that this was going to end well. 

Does that imply that there isn't anyone who thought this through to what the logical conclusion was? 

I keep asking and all I have seen so far can easily be recognized as  fallacious arguments consisting exclusively of reductio ad absurdum or offers to burn down yet another straw man.

Let's hear it:  Walk me through a scenario in which this was going to end well.   

Irrespective of the legal issue that were the focus of the discussion here, local people were already talking to reporters re: the undisputed fact that this bull elk was as tame as a petting zoo mascot. 

And as for damage done to the image of hunters in general, or even "trophy hunters in general, the fact that this act does not and never has had broad based acceptance as acceptable w/in the hunting community who have commented on it will do as much as can be done to put distance between hunters or trophy hunters and the irresponsible act of a few individuals  as ever could be once this became known to the general public.   
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on May 26, 2016, 06:08:11 AM
There is a big difference, it's actually happened here on the west side.  Errors were made, no charges were filed, but then again there wasn't the court of Huntwa to publicly crucify someone and assure their guilt.  I wonder if the charges get dropped off there won't be a civil suit filed against the wdfw and the individuals who granted permission.  I would think some of things posted on this forum would cause parties to settle and not want to go to trial.

remember when Agnew killed the non typical record, flew in and out killed the same day flying??? Blah blah blah..... the list goes on and on...

 A non issue and completely irrelevant to this case, let's not get it twisted and stick to the facts.

Oh....... Ok
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on May 26, 2016, 06:10:07 AM
There is a big difference, it's actually happened here on the west side.  Errors were made, no charges were filed, but then again there wasn't the court of Huntwa to publicly crucify someone and assure their guilt.  I wonder if the charges get dropped off there won't be a civil suit filed against the wdfw and the individuals who granted permission.  I would think some of things posted on this forum would cause parties to settle and not want to go to trial.

remember when Agnew killed the non typical record, flew in and out killed the same day flying??? Blah blah blah..... the list goes on and on...

 A non issue and completely irrelevant to this case, let's not get it twisted and stick to the facts.

Funny how it's the same folks making comments  on aforementioned threads....
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Miles on May 26, 2016, 06:26:48 AM
Everyone is all worked up over this pet elk that an old man shot.   Old Tod doesn't have too many more hunting seasons left in him and that's just a fact of life.  Let him have his day in court.  The self induced added stress probably isn't doing his body any favors.   
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: trophyhunt on May 26, 2016, 06:31:27 AM
I woulda much rather seen "Bullwinkle" ironed out on I-90 by a semi!!
:yeah: agreed, it would have been the end of the story.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Magnum_Willys on May 26, 2016, 06:32:25 AM
I simply cannot get my mind around what could have given anyone the notion that this was going to end well. 

Let's hear it:  Walk me through a scenario in which this was going to end well.

Lips shut.  Animal on wall not facebook.  Taken at firstlight. Landowner paid and happy, state paid and happy, hunter with trophy happy.  Old elk musta finally passed away.  End of story.   

Imo not right nor legal but thats the scenario you would think he woulda followed.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: turbo on May 26, 2016, 07:04:53 AM
I cant believe some of you on here are defending this guy. Shameful and embarrassing for the hunting community. Thanks..
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: dscubame on May 26, 2016, 08:03:47 AM
I simply cannot get my mind around what could have given anyone the notion that this was going to end well. 

Let's hear it:  Walk me through a scenario in which this was going to end well.

Lips shut.  Animal on wall not facebook.  Taken at firstlight. Landowner paid and happy, state paid and happy, hunter with trophy happy.  Old elk musta finally passed away.  End of story.   

Imo not right nor legal but thats the scenario you would think he woulda followed.

You left out the part where you move the whole now dead animal to a legal unit to open it and leave the gut pile.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Alchase on May 26, 2016, 10:13:22 AM
No. He was wrong for shooting an animal in a closed unit. Quit trying to change the subject...

This and only this!

If this single part, had not happened none of this discussion would be happening.

Be responsible for your own dang actions, quit twisting and tweak the details to try to make it seem he was not at fault.


I cant believe some of you on here are defending this guy. Shameful and embarrassing for the hunting community. Thanks..

Honestly, this bothers me as much as the poaching incident itself.

What it boils down to is:

Poaching and defending a poacher.

Everything else is just:

 "trying to pick up a piece of poo by the clean end"
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on May 26, 2016, 10:23:30 AM
Actually it boils down to whether or not it's "poaching" if given permission by someone in WDFW.  Also whether or not that person had the authority to authorize the "hunt".

I'd still like to know exactly what the question was when they supposedly asked for permission.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on May 26, 2016, 10:39:52 AM
 :yeah: :yeah: :yeah: :yeah: :yeah: somebody else gets it. "IF" permission was given/authorized I honestly see him walking whether or not the official was legally authorized to by law.

As I said in every post I'm not defending, supporting or condoning his actions just stated what I believe will occur.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on May 26, 2016, 10:53:16 AM
"IF" permission was given/authorized

 But what you fail to understand is that there is nobody within the WDFW that has that authorization, spin or no spin, that is fact!

 So his, and his fans "defense" is nothing more than slight of hand, an attempt to lead everyone into a false direction.

 He killed the bull in a closed unit. According to state law, there is nobody with authority that can change the regs with a phone call........everything else is spin!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bearpaw on May 26, 2016, 11:10:16 AM
"IF" permission was given/authorized

 But what you fail to understand is that there is nobody within the WDFW that has that authorization, spin or no spin, that is fact!

 So his, and his fans "defense" is nothing more than slight of hand, an attempt to lead everyone into a false direction.

 He killed the bull in a closed unit. According to state law, there is nobody with authority that can change the regs with a phone call........everything else is spin!

I think only the commission, the governor, and possibly the director have the authority to change what units are open or not open. However, I still think it's a reasonable defense for the defendant that he was given permission to hunt by the regulating agency. From the beginning of this topic I've thought that's how this will all boil down.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on May 26, 2016, 11:13:11 AM
"IF" permission was given/authorized

 But what you fail to understand is that there is nobody within the WDFW that has that authorization, spin or no spin, that is fact!

 So his, and his fans "defense" is nothing more than slight of hand, an attempt to lead everyone into a false direction.

 He killed the bull in a closed unit. According to state law, there is nobody with authority that can change the regs with a phone call........everything else is spin!

But as I mentioned earlier...and hypothetically, if there was a phone call, and a WDFW game warden told Mr Reichert he had the approval and to go ahead and shoot the bull, who's fault is it at that point?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bearpaw on May 26, 2016, 11:15:07 AM
"IF" permission was given/authorized

 But what you fail to understand is that there is nobody within the WDFW that has that authorization, spin or no spin, that is fact!

 So his, and his fans "defense" is nothing more than slight of hand, an attempt to lead everyone into a false direction.

 He killed the bull in a closed unit. According to state law, there is nobody with authority that can change the regs with a phone call........everything else is spin!

But as I mentioned earlier...and hypothetically, if there was a phone call, and a WDFW game warden told Mr Reichert he had the approval and to go ahead and shoot the bull, who's fault is it at that point?

I would imagine there will be a reprimand to whomever gave the ultimate OK to go hunt with the muzzy!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on May 26, 2016, 11:22:35 AM
:yeah: :yeah: :yeah: :yeah: :yeah: somebody else gets it. "IF" permission was given/authorized I honestly see him walking whether or not the official was legally authorized to by law.

As I said in every post I'm not defending, supporting or condoning his actions just stated what I believe will occur.

Not really I've gotten it all along..
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Jpmiller on May 26, 2016, 12:15:09 PM
When I was looking into purchasing a new hunting bow I called WDFW for some clarifications on what were and weren't legal. They were surprisingly helpful and took their clarifications an purchased a bow.

Should I have not trusted the word of the WDFW employee who answered the phone? I know it's not exactly apples to apples and it's the individuals responsibility to know the law but when you don't know the law how else should you get clarification.

Whether or not he was told by a game official that it was ok doesn't seem to be known for a fact yet but if he was told it's ok it is hard for me to condemn him.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bearpaw on May 26, 2016, 12:18:31 PM
When I was looking into purchasing a new hunting bow I called WDFW for some clarifications on what were and weren't legal. They were surprisingly helpful and took their clarifications an purchased a bow.

Should I have not trusted the word of the WDFW employee who answered the phone? I know it's not exactly apples to apples and it's the individuals responsibility to know the law but when you don't know the law how else should you get clarification.

Whether or not he was told by a game official that it was ok doesn't seem to be known for a fact yet but if he was told it's ok it is hard for me to condemn him.

 :yeah: That's exactly where I'm at, I've asked questions many times in multiple states and have trusted the responses that I get.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: trophyhunt on May 26, 2016, 12:31:49 PM
"IF" permission was given/authorized

 But what you fail to understand is that there is nobody within the WDFW that has that authorization, spin or no spin, that is fact!

 So his, and his fans "defense" is nothing more than slight of hand, an attempt to lead everyone into a false direction.

 He killed the bull in a closed unit. According to state law, there is nobody with authority that can change the regs with a phone call........everything else is spin!

But as I mentioned earlier...and hypothetically, if there was a phone call, and a WDFW game warden told Mr Reichert he had the approval and to go ahead and shoot the bull, who's fault is it at that point?
WDFW's fault I would say.  That seems pretty simple to me, especially if they admit giving him permission.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: walt on May 26, 2016, 12:40:08 PM
I'm curious how many times he's bought the tag in the past and what are the credentials of the "guides" involved?  I find it really hard to believe none of them knew the regs for the tag and gmu and therefore had to call wdfw.  :dunno:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on May 26, 2016, 12:54:44 PM
I'm curious how many times he's bought the tag in the past and what are the credentials of the "guides" involved?  I find it really hard to believe none of them knew the regs for the tag and gmu and therefore had to call wdfw.  :dunno:
Me too, but........none of that will matter if someone really did give them the go ahead and is willing to admit to it.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on May 26, 2016, 01:17:16 PM
 :yeah:  "IF" permission was granted, that's what it's going to boil down to. It says per rcw/wac who can and can't but the enforcement/regulatory arm of the State allegedly gave permission whether they had the authority or not.

"IF" they own up to it then the argument is they did and why should he be held at fault "IF" they did. WDFW is in my opinion the at-fault party in this for allegedly authoring this incident. 

Sure, this gentleman had a part in this, but the fault lies with the agency for allegedly authoring it knowing full well rcw/wac stated they didn't have that authority.

Essentially, he's got a "get out of jail" free card and he's using it. This gentleman and his "guides" knew the regs, knew the boundaries, knew what weapon, but the alleged permission is what's the turning point.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: trophyhunt on May 26, 2016, 01:51:31 PM
:yeah:  "IF" permission was granted, that's what it's going to boil down to. It says per rcw/wac who can and can't but the enforcement/regulatory arm of the State allegedly gave permission whether they had the authority or not.

"IF" they own up to it then the argument is they did and why should he be held at fault "IF" they did. WDFW is in my opinion the at-fault party in this for allegedly authoring this incident. 

Sure, this gentleman had a part in this, but the fault lies with the agency for allegedly authoring it knowing full well rcw/wac stated they didn't have that authority.

Essentially, he's got a "get out of jail" free card and he's using it. This gentleman and his "guides" knew the regs, knew the boundaries, knew what weapon, but the alleged permission is what's the turning point.
Exactly, and that should be the end of this thread, period.  Simple in my mind.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on May 26, 2016, 02:25:44 PM
Me too jerry, but the whining will continue ...
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: trophyhunt on May 26, 2016, 02:46:56 PM
Me too jerry, but the whining will continue ...
:chuckle: lol, amen brother!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on May 26, 2016, 04:09:56 PM
 Should be a piece of cake for him to prove, all he has to do is hand over the recording or get the WDFW agent to admit it under oath.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on May 26, 2016, 04:19:24 PM
Should be a piece of cake for him to prove, all he has to do is hand over the recording or get the WDFW agent to admit it under oath.
There so many "if's" to this but "if" that happens this thread will absolutely blow up. There will have to be two mods assigned to this thread just to cover it around the clock.

The only thing that will save it is "if" they provide proof draw results are released the next day.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bullkllr on May 26, 2016, 04:36:24 PM
When I was looking into purchasing a new hunting bow I called WDFW for some clarifications on what were and weren't legal. They were surprisingly helpful and took their clarifications an purchased a bow.

Should I have not trusted the word of the WDFW employee who answered the phone? I know it's not exactly apples to apples and it's the individuals responsibility to know the law but when you don't know the law how else should you get clarification.

Whether or not he was told by a game official that it was ok doesn't seem to be known for a fact yet but if he was told it's ok it is hard for me to condemn him.

Somehow I doubt the information they gave you was in direct contradiction to what is available other places, but I could be wrong.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Jpmiller on May 26, 2016, 04:48:48 PM
When I was looking into purchasing a new hunting bow I called WDFW for some clarifications on what were and weren't legal. They were surprisingly helpful and took their clarifications an purchased a bow.

Should I have not trusted the word of the WDFW employee who answered the phone? I know it's not exactly apples to apples and it's the individuals responsibility to know the law but when you don't know the law how else should you get clarification.

Whether or not he was told by a game official that it was ok doesn't seem to be known for a fact yet but if he was told it's ok it is hard for me to condemn him.

Somehow I doubt the information they gave you was in direct contradiction to what is available other places, but I could be wrong.

It made sense with what I was reading in the regs the way they were able to explain it true, but I do not think the same way everyone else does. There are alot of thing people can't quite figure out that I can. I am no smarter than the average person.

The question is where should you go if you clarification? If not WDFW then where?
 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on May 26, 2016, 05:00:10 PM
 :yeah: they should learn from this incident and create a policy that addresses this issue so it won't happen again. Have a designated dept or person (s) be the ones to provide regulatory answers and not just Joe Schmoe employee that guesses because they don't understand themselves. I don't think all the wdfw employees know and understand the regs much less are outdoors type people.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: mfswallace on May 26, 2016, 05:09:28 PM
No clarification needed on this simple issue! Closed gmu for branched antler bulls. My 6 year old understands it, why can't 257 and everyone excusing this poaching incident understand no call was needed in the first place. How many gov tags has he had and he's dense enough to not understand something so simple :yike:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Ghost Hunter on May 26, 2016, 05:13:08 PM
No clarification needed on this simple issue! Closed gmu for branched antler bulls. My 6 year old understands it, why can't 257 and everyone excusing this poaching incident understand no call was needed in the first place. How many gov tags has he had and he's dense enough to not understand something so simple :yike:

Tell us how you really feel. :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle: :tup:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on May 26, 2016, 05:19:12 PM
It is that simple. That's not the issue, what I'm raising is the strong possibility that "IF" he got the okay from wdfw he's more than likely walking. Not denying he nor his "guides" didn't know as I'm sure they knew but the fact that "IF" he allegedly got permission from an official that was legally per rcw/wac not authorized to do so then the brunt of the responsibility is wdfw's. A judge or jury that hears from an wdfw official that they authorized it willfully knowing that per rcw/wac they couldn't but still did are accepting the responsibility for changing the tag requirements. Even though they can't per rcw/wac. Any judge/jury is going to say it was his responsibility to know, but he was given permission by an official of wdfw and he should share the responsibility on his behalf but again, he was authorized to.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: mfswallace on May 26, 2016, 05:24:16 PM
It is that simple. That's not the issue, what I'm raising is the strong possibility that "IF" he got the okay from wdfw he's more than likely walking. Not denying he nor his "guides" didn't know as I'm sure they knew but the fact that "IF" he allegedly got permission from an official that was legally per rcw/wac not authorized to do so then the brunt of the responsibility is wdfw's. A judge or jury that hears from an wdfw official that they authorized it willfully knowing that per rcw/wac they couldn't but still did are accepting the responsibility for changing the tag requirements. Even though they can't per rcw/wac. Any judge/jury is going to say it was his responsibility to know, but he was given permission by an official of wdfw and he should share the responsibility on his behalf but again, he was authorized to.

By all means they should share the responsibility and said wdfw employee/employees should be held responsible on a criminal level just like tod and crew :twocents:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on May 26, 2016, 05:53:37 PM
No clarification needed on this simple issue! Closed gmu for branched antler bulls. My 6 year old understands it, why can't 257 and everyone excusing this poaching incident understand no call was needed in the first place. How many gov tags has he had and he's dense enough to not understand something so simple :yike:

Some of you guys its just cut and dry, hopefully you guys don't ever get jammed up!!....

And here we go, " how many governor tags has he had"??  Though most of you will never admit it, if the tables were turned and it was a everyday Joe that did this, it woulda only been a couple pages. Because of the accused is who he is, Tod is held to a higher standard.. He's gonna walk...
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: h20hunter on May 26, 2016, 06:07:53 PM
A poll would be interesting.  Simple yes or no. Walk or no walk. My money is he walks with zero repurcussions. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on May 26, 2016, 06:11:31 PM
And I'll be willing to bet, knowing the state and how they do things, the person that gave him the go ahead might get a verbal reprimand at most...
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: h20hunter on May 26, 2016, 06:13:29 PM
Fine.  $1 says they get a stern talking to!  :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 26, 2016, 06:20:35 PM
No clarification needed on this simple issue! Closed gmu for branched antler bulls. My 6 year old understands it, why can't 257 and everyone excusing this poaching incident understand no call was needed in the first place. How many gov tags has he had and he's dense enough to not understand something so simple :yike:

In order to get to a conclusion that everything was on the up and up, assumptions have to be accepted that demand a series of logical leaps and coincidences to all come together.  While that would not make it impossible it certainly complicates preferring that version of events.


*****************************************

Did the call go like this:   

Caller: Is this South Central Big Game Auction Tag valid for elk under any circumstances in GMU 334?

WDFW:  What does it say in the Game Regs?

Caller: It says - Elk: Any 300 or 500 series GMU open to elk hunting except GMUs not open to branch antlered bull elk hunting

WDFW: Does GMU 334 have any elk season that allows the taking of branch antlered bull elk?

Caller:  No, not that I can locate. 

WDFW:  I think you have just answered your own question.

Or did the call go like this:

Caller: Can a disabled hunter shoot an elk with a high-power rifle in GMU 334 south of the canal?

WDFW:  No, anyone hunting elk in that area would need to use a slug gun, muzzle loader, a bow, a crossbow or a hand gun that meets the firearm restriction.

Caller:  Even if the disabled hunter has a South Central Big Game Auction Tag if he wants to shoot an elk in GMU 334?

WDFW:  Yes, even if the disabled hunter has a South Central Big Game Tag. 

Caller:  So it is OK to hunt elk in GMU 334, but he would have to use a muzzle loader?

WDFW:  Yes, or some other weapon that is legal to hunt elk with in GMU 334.

Caller:   Hey guys, guess what, bla bla @ WDFW just gave the all clear.     


Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on May 26, 2016, 06:23:31 PM
Fine.  $1 says they get a stern talking to!  :chuckle:

Oh I bet!! Grin
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on May 26, 2016, 06:38:56 PM

I keep asking and all I have seen so far can easily be recognized as  fallacious arguments consisting exclusively of reductio ad absurdum or offers to burn down yet another straw man.





This might be the funniest thing I've read on the inteweb all year..... Dead language and all.

And in that spirit:    I've ottagay etgay ovingmay.




Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on May 26, 2016, 06:46:58 PM
I suspect the call didn't go like either scenario. Something tells me that the call coincidentally went after an unsuccessful and rather unfortunate incident involving the death of one of the other pets and when the call was made it was asking permission to fulfill the raffle tag since they were trying to move the pets anyways and bungled a previous attempt.

Subsequently, resulting in the official as previously stated said they would call back as they needed to find out from the powers above if that tag holder would be approved to kill one of the pets. The call was returned stating he was given authorization and he proceeded forward.

So, why no uproar over the other pet dying twisted in barb wire fencing and having to be put down?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Todd_ID on May 26, 2016, 06:53:03 PM
My word, this is the train that just keeps on wrecking.  Why not let it die for a while until the judge has a say?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: danderson on May 26, 2016, 06:55:22 PM
  Having been the recipient of a incentive tag I know mine came with a detailed letter explaining all the open units , maps and restrictions for that particular hunt, also included were  the  names and phone numbers of the game department contacts for the hunt, with my tag I had to call in and report each day were I was hunting, no wiggle room for a person to say they didn't  know the stipulations of the hunt, the tag holder is ultimately responsible for making sure the the hunt is legal, there was no baiting for a particular answer allowed, it was pretty black and white.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on May 26, 2016, 06:59:16 PM
I suspect the call didn't go like either scenario. Something tells me that the call coincidentally went after an unsuccessful and rather unfortunate incident involving the death of one of the other pets and when the call was made it was asking permission to fulfill the raffle tag since they were trying to move the pets anyways and bungled a previous attempt.

Subsequently, resulting in the official as previously stated said they would call back as they needed to find out from the powers above if that tag holder would be approved to kill one of the pets. The call was returned stating he was given authorization and he proceeded forward.

So, why no uproar over the other pet dying twisted in barb wire fencing and having to be put down?

All I can say to that is:   "I keep asking and all I have seen so far can easily be recognized as  fallacious arguments consisting exclusively of reductio ad absurdum or offers to burn down yet another straw man."

 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 26, 2016, 07:01:26 PM
  Having been the recipient of a incentive tag I know mine came with a detailed letter explaining all the open units , maps and restrictions for that particular hunt, also included were  the  names and phone numbers of the game department contacts for the hunt, with my tag I had to call in and report each day were I was hunting, no wiggle room for a person to say they didn't  know the stipulations of the hunt, the tag holder is ultimately responsible for making sure the the hunt is legal, there was no baiting for a particular answer allowed, it was pretty black and white.

 :tup:  Yup, that is the way it works. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: trophyhunt on May 26, 2016, 07:05:52 PM
A poll would be interesting.  Simple yes or no. Walk or no walk. My money is he walks with zero repurcussions.
start the poll!  He will walk, IF fish and game acknowledge that they gave him permission!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: h20hunter on May 26, 2016, 07:07:08 PM
 :chuckle: :chuckle:

I think there is plenty of speculation and drama without a formal poll.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: popeshawnpaul on May 26, 2016, 08:04:40 PM
How can you do a poll when nobody (except JDHasty) knows all the exact facts.  The poll would ask...  What do you think the facts are and assuming you think you know the facts what do you think 6 random people that you don't know will find for the defendant if this case ever gets to trial...?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: trophyhunt on May 26, 2016, 08:15:34 PM
How can you do a poll when nobody (except JDHasty) knows all the exact facts.  The poll would ask...  What do you think the facts are and assuming you think you know the facts what do you think 6 random people that you don't know will find for the defendant if this case ever gets to trial...?
Im thinking the poll could be," if the Wdfw gave the guy permission, is he guilty of poaching or any crime"?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on May 26, 2016, 08:52:49 PM
 What poll should ask is "Do you believe Tod Reichert can prove he was given permission by WDFW?"

 Because if he can't, it's a open and shut case! :twocents:
Title: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: mfswallace on May 26, 2016, 09:11:32 PM
No clarification needed on this simple issue! Closed gmu for branched antler bulls. My 6 year old understands it, why can't 257 and everyone excusing this poaching incident understand no call was needed in the first place. How many gov tags has he had and he's dense enough to not understand something so simple :yike:

Some of you guys its just cut and dry, hopefully you guys don't ever get jammed up!!....

And here we go, " how many governor tags has he had"??  Though most of you will never admit it, if the tables were turned and it was a everyday Joe that did this, it woulda only been a couple pages. Because of the accused is who he is, Tod is held to a higher standard.. He's gonna walk...

An average joe wouldn't have been hunting in a closed unit but since tod has all the money he needs to keep breaking the law he doesn't give a ....
Keep going 257 but poaching is poaching and as Danderson explained you get very explicit instructions on where to hunt so he should have never hired you and your crew to look in 334 for a branched antlered bull...
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 26, 2016, 09:13:59 PM
How can you do a poll when nobody (except JDHasty) knows all the exact facts.  The poll would ask...  What do you think the facts are and assuming you think you know the facts what do you think 6 random people that you don't know will find for the defendant if this case ever gets to trial...?

I am confident that what I have stated as fact is accurate.  As far as what are my recollections re: the earlier incident that took place in 2007 and wrapped up in 2012 I have made it clear that this is what I recall when I could not link to validation that documented fact I referenced.  As far as the alleged call, I have said:  Given the reputation of the WDFW individual that the "permission" has been attributed to, I am skeptical that explicit permission was granted.  I have also said I am skeptical that that individual's direct supervisor would have signed off as well.   

I do not know this:  There is probable cause to file charges and there was little chance, from day one, that charges would not be filed.     
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bean Counter on May 26, 2016, 09:14:41 PM
My word, this is the train that just keeps on wrecking.  Why not let it die for a while until the judge has a say?

We interrupt this regularly scheduled urinating match to bring you an important announcement:



 .... That is all. Thank you  :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on May 26, 2016, 09:24:04 PM
Anybody else not really care that he shot a pet? Honestly, he can have all the pets he wants just leave the wild ones alone as I'd like to get them. :tup:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on May 26, 2016, 09:26:36 PM
I bet, if it was me that shot the pet this wouldn't have garnered 70 plus pages combined. :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 26, 2016, 09:26:50 PM
I simply cannot get my mind around what could have given anyone the notion that this was going to end well. 

Let's hear it:  Walk me through a scenario in which this was going to end well.

Lips shut.  Animal on wall not facebook.  Taken at firstlight. Landowner paid and happy, state paid and happy, hunter with trophy happy.  Old elk musta finally passed away.  End of story.   

Imo not right nor legal but thats the scenario you would think he woulda followed.

The fact is that in the days that followed there was posting of photos online bragging as well as boasting in the local watering holes. 

If you think this did not char the hind end of a heck of a lot of locals who knew that this bull was there, but it was not legal to kill him... you are not living in the real world.  Once word started to circulate of the location in which the bull was shot their butts were burnt to a crisp. 

IMHO, the perps tried to slip in after most people had left for the day, drop the bull, load him into the bed of a truck without leaving any evidence, and GTH outa' GMU 334 before anyone was wise to what had transpired. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: chester on May 26, 2016, 09:38:29 PM


Some of you guys its just cut and dry, hopefully you guys don't ever get jammed up!!....

And here we go, " how many governor tags has he had"??  Though most of you will never admit it, if the tables were turned and it was a everyday Joe that did this, it woulda only been a couple pages. Because of the accused is who he is, Tod is held to a higher standard.. He's gonna walk...

Higher standard? If this was an average joe you are correct it would have only been a couple pages, because Average joe would have lost his vehicle, weapons, and the bull immediately.
They wouldn't have drug on so long filing charges .
All the defenders I've seen here just seem to for lack of a better way to put it, just assume money makes you above the law.

Closed unit+dead bull= poached . It's pretty a simple.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on May 27, 2016, 12:26:53 AM
I simply cannot get my mind around what could have given anyone the notion that this was going to end well. 

Let's hear it:  Walk me through a scenario in which this was going to end well.

Lips shut.  Animal on wall not facebook.  Taken at firstlight. Landowner paid and happy, state paid and happy, hunter with trophy happy.  Old elk musta finally passed away.  End of story.   

Imo not right nor legal but thats the scenario you would think he woulda followed.

The fact is that in the days that followed there was posting of photos online bragging as well as boasting in the local watering holes. 

If you think this did not char the hind end of a heck of a lot of locals who knew that this bull was there, but it was not legal to kill him... you are not living in the real world.  Once word started to circulate of the location in which the bull was shot their butts were burnt to a crisp. 

IMHO, the perps tried to slip in after most people had left for the day, drop the bull, load him into the bed of a truck without leaving any evidence, and GTH outa' GMU 334 before anyone was wise to what had transpired.

I notice folks are worried, well some folks are, worried about this whole incident giving hunting a "black eye". Well, nothing is pretty or kind about killin, it is what it is, but it's not pretty period.... some have smeared this case far and wide to further they're agenda, whatever that may be. The funny thing is they only get mileage here... is it a wolf in sheeps clothing???
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: KNOPHISH on May 27, 2016, 05:40:31 AM
I have read that he's a handicapped hunter, What is his disability & does he have a sticker?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 27, 2016, 05:47:21 AM
I simply cannot get my mind around what could have given anyone the notion that this was going to end well. 

Let's hear it:  Walk me through a scenario in which this was going to end well.

Lips shut.  Animal on wall not facebook.  Taken at firstlight. Landowner paid and happy, state paid and happy, hunter with trophy happy.  Old elk musta finally passed away.  End of story.   

Imo not right nor legal but thats the scenario you would think he woulda followed.

The fact is that in the days that followed there was posting of photos online bragging as well as boasting in the local watering holes. 

If you think this did not char the hind end of a heck of a lot of locals who knew that this bull was there, but it was not legal to kill him... you are not living in the real world.  Once word started to circulate of the location in which the bull was shot their butts were burnt to a crisp. 

IMHO, the perps tried to slip in after most people had left for the day, drop the bull, load him into the bed of a truck without leaving any evidence, and GTH outa' GMU 334 before anyone was wise to what had transpired.

I notice folks are worried, well some folks are, worried about this whole incident giving hunting a "black eye". Well, nothing is pretty or kind about killin, it is what it is, but it's not pretty period.... some have smeared this case far and wide to further they're agenda, whatever that may be. The funny thing is they only get mileage here... is it a wolf in sheeps clothing???

I do not see how it gives "hunting a black eye" when it is evident that only a small minority within the hunting community will validate the decision to target and kill this elk.  Fact of the matter is, if a poll were put up It would not surprise me if north of 90% of the people right here on this forum, asking if shooting this animal was a responsible thing to do, it would not surprise me if north of 90% chose no as apposed to yes.  In other words, most hunters would not think this was going to end well.

As far as the legalities go, I am aware of facts that lead me to the decision that it was Unlawful Hunting of Big Game II, if there is anything that exonerates those involved... WDFW and the Kittitas County Prosecutor have not recognized it.  If they had, filing charges would not have been such an easy decision. 

I don't know if there is anything out there to exonerate these folks, but as I have said:  I'm skeptical.  In the first place no one has the authority to "give permission," and secondarily I am not inclined to give the benefit of the doubt to individuals who have acted in the manner that those making that claim have acted.     

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: HntnFsh on May 27, 2016, 06:50:29 AM
I have read that he's a handicapped hunter, What is his disability & does he have a sticker?

Curious how that's relevant to this case? Or were you just curious about that?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on May 27, 2016, 07:19:32 AM
Anybody else not really care that he shot a pet? Honestly, he can have all the pets he wants just leave the wild ones alone as I'd like to get them. :tup:


Hmmmmmmm.........    That's a really interesting perspective.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 2MANY on May 27, 2016, 07:24:14 AM
This is a forum not a "CASE".

Obviously their are physical limitations at the hunter's age.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: HntnFsh on May 27, 2016, 07:28:00 AM
This is a forum not a "CASE".

Obviously their are physical limitations at the hunter's age.

If you haven't noticed this thread is about a particular case. And whether Todd is disabled or has physical limitations affects this case how? Not at all from what I can see!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: KNOPHISH on May 27, 2016, 07:31:57 AM
I have read that he's a handicapped hunter, What is his disability & does he have a sticker?

Curious how that's relevant to this case? Or were you just curious about that?
Was thinking disabled get special privileges. Not sure it would pertain to the case.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on May 27, 2016, 07:33:34 AM
The topic of locking this thread again has been brought up by the mod's for discussion again. Name calling and meaningless insults need to stop or the lock will happen.
Please keep that in mind moving forward.

 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on May 27, 2016, 07:34:26 AM
I have read that he's a handicapped hunter, What is his disability & does he have a sticker?

Curious how that's relevant to this case? Or were you just curious about that?
Was thinking disabled get special privileges. Not sure it would pertain to the case.

They do. Privileges like shooting from a vehicle, special permits, etc. Not shooting bulls in closed units.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 2MANY on May 27, 2016, 07:35:58 AM
This is a forum not a "CASE".

Obviously their are physical limitations at the hunter's age.

If you haven't noticed this thread is about a particular case. And whether Todd is disabled or has physical limitations affects this case how? Not at all from what I can see!

Toledo is a small town isn't it?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on May 27, 2016, 07:57:41 AM
This topic is so  >:( , it's more  >:( than the Bigfoot thread. >:(  I think we can squeeze 400 plus pages out of this. :chuckle:  I mean... >:(
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on May 27, 2016, 07:58:39 AM
This is a forum not a "CASE".

Obviously their are physical limitations at the hunter's age.

If you haven't noticed this thread is about a particular case. And whether Todd is disabled or has physical limitations affects this case how? Not at all from what I can see!

Toledo is a small town isn't it?
:dunno:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: HntnFsh on May 27, 2016, 08:24:49 AM
This is a forum not a "CASE".

Obviously their are physical limitations at the hunter's age.

If you haven't noticed this thread is about a particular case. And whether Todd is disabled or has physical limitations affects this case how? Not at all from what I can see!

Toledo is a small town isn't it?

Sure is. Whatcha getting at?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: HUNTINCOUPLE on May 27, 2016, 08:29:57 AM
Is there a shoulder mount of this Bullwinkle Bull to view somewhere? With all the attention he should be put in the Smithsonian Museum or somewhere?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: HntnFsh on May 27, 2016, 09:00:14 AM
The topic of locking this thread again has been brought up by the mod's for discussion again. Name calling and meaningless insults need to stop or the lock will happen.
Please keep that in mind moving forward.

I understand how difficult it can be for the mods to stay on top of this. But it would be a shame to punish the majority because of the minority. What about just coming down a little harder on the offenders?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on May 27, 2016, 09:05:18 AM
The topic of locking this thread again has been brought up by the mod's for discussion again. Name calling and meaningless insults need to stop or the lock will happen.
Please keep that in mind moving forward.

I understand how difficult it can be for the mods to stay on top of this. But it would be a shame to punish the majority because of the minority. What about just coming down a little harder on the offenders?

There have been entire threads on this topic deleted, there have been multiple members banned, probably a dozen warnings thrown out and multiple posts in this thread warning others.
Not sure how much more we can do to get folks to cooperate. We all have jobs, lives, families, etc. We don't get paid to do this contrary to what might be popular belief. We are not babysitters and the adults on here participating in this thread should be able to realize that. If they can't, I'm afraid we can't help.


Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: HntnFsh on May 27, 2016, 09:11:34 AM
The topic of locking this thread again has been brought up by the mod's for discussion again. Name calling and meaningless insults need to stop or the lock will happen.
Please keep that in mind moving forward.

I understand how difficult it can be for the mods to stay on top of this. But it would be a shame to punish the majority because of the minority. What about just coming down a little harder on the offenders?

There have been entire threads on this topic deleted, there have been multiple members banned, probably a dozen warnings thrown out and multiple posts in this thread warning others.
Not sure how much more we can do to get folks to cooperate. We all have jobs, lives, families, etc. We don't get paid to do this contrary to what might be popular belief. We are not babysitters and the adults on here participating in this thread should be able to realize that. If they can't, I'm afraid we can't help.

Cant argue with that! Unfortunately I believe that the whole objective of some people on here is to get the thread deleted.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: DaveMonti on May 27, 2016, 09:14:50 AM
I personally don't see any value of keeping this open.  The same people keep repeating the same "facts", same theories as to why this happened, theories on what was going through peoples minds, and even speculating on the mental health of the folks involved. 

However, money is to be made by internet page views, and this topic, along with other useless threads like "Bigfoot", "Word Association Game" and "Chain Reaction Game", all generate consistent numbers of views, and money.  I can't blame anyone for keeping them going, despite their uselessness. 

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on May 27, 2016, 09:21:40 AM
I personally don't see any value of keeping this open.  The same people keep repeating the same "facts", same theories as to why this happened, theories on what was going through peoples minds, and even speculating on the mental health of the folks involved. 

However, money is to be made by internet page views, and this topic, along with other useless threads like "Bigfoot", "Word Association Game" and "Chain Reaction Game", all generate consistent numbers of views, and money.  I can't blame anyone for keeping them going, despite their uselessness. 



I normally agree with you on most everything, Dave...but I gotta disagree on this one. I don't see a problem with a few threads where folks are having a good time and not starting trouble or endlessly complaining about things. The last 3 threads you mentioned are the ones I'm referring to. This isn't exactly a cash cow for anyone. What I mean by that is I'm pretty sure this forum barely makes enough money as it stands for Dale to not have to pay out of pocket to keep it up and running.

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on May 27, 2016, 09:33:27 AM
I can say that I have gone full circle on this one because of all of the dialogue.  There are those that are hard set one way or the other but there is a lot going on here if you can filter through it all.

First I started out thinking no way would he shoot a bull in a closed unit.  I argued that moving the bull before field dressing was no biggie, it was probably a request of the landowner.  Then the confirmation that it was in a closed unit.  Then the rumors of a phone call.  Each step of the way I have had a different opinion on what might have happened.

I think more than anything, this should be learning experience for everyone to not jump to conclusions and always be mindful of what you are doing and how it could be viewed and interpreted by others.  Not only by those in your circle but other hunters outside your circle and non hunters.

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 2MANY on May 27, 2016, 09:53:53 AM
This is a forum not a "CASE".

Obviously their are physical limitations at the hunter's age.

If you haven't noticed this thread is about a particular case. And whether Todd is disabled or has physical limitations affects this case how? Not at all from what I can see!

Toledo is a small town isn't it?

Sure is. Whatcha getting at?

What I was getting at is this is such a grand standing type issue, the town is small, and the individual is well known. I'm sure the locals have many of the facts that are considered not relevant. My 2 cents.
No more.............no less.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: DaveMonti on May 27, 2016, 10:48:46 AM
I personally don't see any value of keeping this open.  The same people keep repeating the same "facts", same theories as to why this happened, theories on what was going through peoples minds, and even speculating on the mental health of the folks involved. 

However, money is to be made by internet page views, and this topic, along with other useless threads like "Bigfoot", "Word Association Game" and "Chain Reaction Game", all generate consistent numbers of views, and money.  I can't blame anyone for keeping them going, despite their uselessness. 



I normally agree with you on most everything, Dave...but I gotta disagree on this one. I don't see a problem with a few threads where folks are having a good time and not starting trouble or endlessly complaining about things. The last 3 threads you mentioned are the ones I'm referring to. This isn't exactly a cash cow for anyone. What I mean by that is I'm pretty sure this forum barely makes enough money as it stands for Dale to not have to pay out of pocket to keep it up and running.


I'm quite sure that nobody is getting rich off of this site, but the truth is that these threads do generate clicks, views, and responses that at least help the site break even financially.  I don't blame anyone at all.  I personally don't look at the three threads I mentioned after I checked them out for the first time.  Sure, people are having fun, but I personally don't see any value or entertainment in the three threads I mentioned. 

As far as this topic, there have been LOTS of warnings (certainly more than a dozen), no real useful dialogue, and a few other threads shut down due to the risk of lawsuits.  Why keep this one alive?  It's been beaten to death, is riskier than other topics, and probably takes a LOT of time to moderate, with nothing of value coming out of it.

Why keep it alive despite all this?  The reason is simple, it helps to generate income for the site, and I don't blame anyone for that.  Without 70+ pages, thousands of views, the site may be losing money instead of breaking even.  Things always get down to money, and when the risk of losing money through legal action becomes greater than the benefit of clicks, this thread will be shut down and another one started.  That's business.  I can't believe that the reason this thread remains open is out of the goodness of the owner to provide a place for frustrated hunters to vent or be entertained.  This site is not a social program, it's here to provide some value to the owner.  Always. 

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on May 27, 2016, 11:36:37 AM
I tell you what, if it wasn't for the good folks in the "BF" thread I probably wouldn't visit here as much. Sure, it started as serious as possible and it then took a life of its own. It's entertaining and there are still times when it does have some serious stories brought in but I don't see why anybody would want it deleted because they don't like it?

I'm not on here whining and crying about other threads that I deem as useless such as this one and countless others. Everybody has their opinions, thoughts, priorities and concerns so let them have them. There is an ignore button. :tup:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on May 27, 2016, 11:38:05 AM
 :yeah:  Plat.   :tup:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on May 27, 2016, 12:34:28 PM
This thread has been all fun and games until now. But the instant you bad mouthed the Big Foot thread you went too far.

 >:(
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: DaveMonti on May 27, 2016, 12:50:50 PM
I'm preparing myself for being banned for stating that I don't find any value in the Bigfoot thread. 
Have a nice weekend folks.  I hope it isn't a 30 day ban.  I'll lose touch with all the exciting new developments in the Bullwinkle case. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: h20hunter on May 27, 2016, 12:56:34 PM
Then ice for sure. Have a great weekend Dave!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: coachcw on May 27, 2016, 12:59:12 PM
So I understand everyone should know the boundary's and rules to the unit your hunting , I understand the game reg booklet is only a abbreviation of the laws . But If you call and ask a question and get a answer it should be viable . I'm not saying this hunter wasn't trying to get a yes when they should have known the rules pertaining to this hunt . Through the grape vine the story I got was a person from the dept did not tell him he could kill a bull but that's all hearsay . there should be a quick q and a section on the web that we could get answers quickly and print them off . I have passed animals before   just because  I wasn't sure . better safe than this mess .
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: coachcw on May 27, 2016, 12:59:52 PM
Get out and do some tree knocking !
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: b0bbyg on May 27, 2016, 01:03:38 PM
Number of pictures I have seen of Bullwinkle   0
Number of pictures I have seen of Bigfoot       0

So far I rate both threads equal.   Neither has pictures so I choose not to believe   :chuckle: :chuckle:


Now if we are talking the animated Bullwinkle of my youth, Big fan  :)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on May 27, 2016, 01:35:10 PM
You're not looking hard enough if you haven't seen pics of Bullwinkle or Bigfoot.  :twocents:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: h20hunter on May 27, 2016, 01:43:18 PM
Just google bull Winkle elk....first one that comes up is from the yak Herald.  He's laying in a frosty field just chilling out.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: b0bbyg on May 27, 2016, 01:56:23 PM
You're not looking hard enough if you haven't seen pics of Bullwinkle or Bigfoot.  :twocents:

Guilty as charged!     Just seems wrong for an elk to be called Bullwinkle

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on May 27, 2016, 02:16:23 PM
Number of pictures I have seen of Bullwinkle   0
Number of pictures I have seen of Bigfoot       0

So far I rate both threads equal.   Neither has pictures so I choose not to believe   :chuckle: :chuckle:


Now if we are talking the animated Bullwinkle of my youth, Big fan  :)

Last one is his auction tag bull.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on May 27, 2016, 02:35:18 PM
Pretty sure I see a Big Foot in the 3rd pic!!!!      :yike:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnfmly on May 27, 2016, 02:45:43 PM
did I read a couple Pages back that the bull was disabled and had a sticker on it  :-)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on May 27, 2016, 02:59:16 PM
You're not looking hard enough if you haven't seen pics of Bullwinkle or Bigfoot.  :twocents:

 :yeah: >:( 

This useless thread needs to be locked before I started finger pointing and name calling :tung:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: DaveMonti on May 27, 2016, 08:35:20 PM
Wait, Bigfoot killed the bull???  This is becoming crazypants. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 27, 2016, 08:38:14 PM
To set the record straight:  The earlier thread was dormant for weeks, and I was perfectly content to leave it alone, until Cboom called me out, not once but twice.  Then he proceeded to post the most outrageous libel about another member who dared to cite fact. 

This individual was doing all he could to get the thread locked down, and then he was given the heave ho for a month. 

There was a time when certain individuals posting here disputed facts that neither side was contesting.  It now appears that they have given up on that tack.

If this bull had been dropped in his tracks, loaded into the bed of a pickup and then spirited out of GMU 334 leaving no trace and if there were no independent witnesses... then it might have "ended well."

If the only thing the locals knew was that the bull was shot, but they had no idea that he had not wandered (or been driven) up north into a legal branch antlered GMU, they would have missed him, but "no harm, no foul," and it might have "ended well." 

If certain participant(s) had not been "kicking sand in the face," by posting on facebook and bragging up the act in the favored watering holes of local hunters, who would have liked a shot at that bull if it were ever possible to catch him up north, then they too might not have "gone ballistic" when it came out that the bull had been killed well within GMU 334, then it might have "ended well."

But none of those conditions were realized.  None of those conditions were likely to materialize either.  I just don't recognize a scenario in which, from the very start, this "ended well."

I have been on the receiving end of more than my share of SNide remARKs, SNARK, and have responded with snark of my own.  But never have I done so without provocation. 

If I wanted to I could have responded to those who tried to set up a tenable case for taking this elk by referencing the well intentioned, but failed, attempt to implement non lethal means to deal with another bull elk by saying that if the WDFW had thought fast they could have propped up the dead carcass of the elk that died in that incident in the middle of a hay meadow.  Sold an Auction Tag to someone with money to burn and allowed them to put a patched roundball into that animal and tag a trophy that has as much trophy value associated with it as does this animal, give or take 75 points.   And that money would have gone to support elk habitat and conservation efforts too. But I did not. 

Even though, try as they might, I don't think anyone could ever get me to recognize one as a superior hunting trophy over the other.  If you accept that any mature bull of this class, taken in a fair chase hunt is a hunting trophy, I could have made a compelling case that there is greater equivalence in value of both as a hunting trophy than there is distinction.

What I am getting at is that I have a friend who functions as a "clearing house" for what is going on in the Kittitas Valley and what I have posted re: the who, what, when and where has been validated.  Not that I needed independent validation to have confidence in what I posted with regards to the facts. 

Just by coincidence the individual who others have said "dropped the green flag" happens to be a good friend of mine's brother and that lead me to post an opinion of skepticism.  I have also posted that it is my understanding that no one has authority to authorize what is being offered as a mitigating factor. 

And I have been attacked.  I have been subjected to mockery, I have been subjected to insult and character assassination.

Over and over I have stated that I do not know Mr Reichert, but I know of Mr Reichert.  I gave a rundown of what I know and what I recall of the earlier incident and have made a distinction between what I posted as fact and what I recalled. 

I have made it clear that:  To the best of my knowledge Mr Reichert has an excellent reputation in his community and that I think this was an oversight on his part, he used poor judgement if you will, but made it a point to say that that does not mean that I see Mr Reichert as a bad man.   

I have looked for an explanation that explains why Mr Reichert would put himself in a position of being within a mile of being in such a mess and have explored every thing that I could come up with.  I have shared my thoughts on that subject.

Like it or not, Obsessive Compulsive Disorder, is a logical explanation.  I think we can all recognize and accept Mr Reichert's passion is elk and elk hunting in particular. 

I see the most logical explanation as Mr Reichert being oblivious to the potential risks involved.  I ask myself why?  Well Mr Reichert runs a large business and this could be explained as simple negligence.  Mr Reichert could have naively accepted what he was told by his hunting consultant and not fact checked it.  That implies poor judgement when it is you who is ultimately responsible to check, and double check.  Does it not? 

But given how well known this animal was and the likelihood that this would not end well even if legal, I also recognize that he may have a problem that seriously complicates him using sound judgement.  That would explain the recklessness of a man with a history targeting this particular bull given the fact that even if legal, killing it would not reflect well on him and maybe on hunting in general.

And then I stated why I don't think that is "somewhere anyone wants to go" in their defense.

I am looking at the charge,  Unlawful Hunting of Big Game II and I am confident of what I know are facts.  I have also considered the mitigating circumstances that are being offered in defense and to be perfectly honest, I am skeptical that any supposed phone call went down as it is being portrayed here, and even if it did I am unfamiliar with anything what so ever in the law that gives anyone the notion that anyone had the authority to give the thumbs up. 

And on top of every legal aspect of the case, by early this year this was headed toward Mr Reichert being the recipient of the Dr Walter Palmer DDS Lifetime Achievement Award in the Patio Elk Category in the press.  Early on I didn't know Bullwinkle the elk from Cleopatra Queen of the Nile the elk.  But once I was made aware that that is what the story was being pursued as....  Hell, that puts a whole new spin on this. 

I was told that reporters were asking pointed questions and obviously wanting to develop a story of a tame elk, Bullwinkle, being assassinated in cold blood.  By a hunter.  Hey, I telegraphed that and deliberately and systematically laid out a case for self reporting citing an oversight or poor judgement and doing what politicians do by getting "in front" of the story and thereby retaining some ability to determine the narrative. 

Once it was apparent that Bullwinkle was where this was headed, if Steve Hormel had been on the ball, a Public Relations firm, and a good one, should have been in charge. 

It is a mess now, it is a hot mess and it is out there. 

I have taken a lot of criticism for posting this on "hunting sites."  OK, fine - but my intention is to put something out there that distances hunters, and especially trophy hunters" from what went down here.  And if you look at what has been posted.... you do the math.  Reporters have work hard to find a quote that does not distance hunters from this act. 

 

       

 

 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jmscon on May 27, 2016, 08:39:30 PM
Now I'm confused, the pics are not of the same bull?!!? The last pic has an atypical tin, a big one at that!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 27, 2016, 08:42:48 PM
Italics not mine up thread!!  Tried to correct, but not happening. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Mfowl on May 27, 2016, 08:47:12 PM
Now I'm confused, the pics are not of the same bull?!!? The last pic has an atypical tin, a big one at that!

The last pic is a different bull from a different auction tag.

Keep fighting the good fight JD!  :tup:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on May 27, 2016, 09:00:35 PM
Now I'm confused, the pics are not of the same bull?!!? The last pic has an atypical tin, a big one at that!

Read the text in the post. ;)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jmscon on May 27, 2016, 09:03:24 PM
Just saw that, thank you!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kentrek on May 27, 2016, 09:49:22 PM
JD....how does degrading the animal help your case ?

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: emac on May 27, 2016, 09:55:09 PM
Now I'm confused, the pics are not of the same bull?!!? The last pic has an atypical tin, a big one at that!

Read the text in the post. ;)


The photos make it even more clear that this individual was not in any way going to ever show up in the field as a fair chase trophy elk. 

He is what he lived his life out as, a steer with bigger than normal elk antlers. 

This guy never fought for anything, much less keeping a nimrod from putting a bullet into his ribs. 

He lucked out when he was a spike.  There is no more glory in killing him with a muzzle loader that there is in holding the bolt gun in a feed bolt operation. 

No one goes home after converting a steer into tomorrow's offering at Whole Foods than they do when they send wieners off to Hormel.   For God's sake, let us put shooting a bull in a hay meadow into perspective. 

He never was a hunting trophy  and he never will be.  His place in Boone & Crocket holds no more significance than does a monster steer. 

He is, and never was going to be a "hunting trophy."
See this is where I finally have to disagree with you. I have followed this well before it even became a thread. And JD I have pretty much agreed with 99% of what you have said through all 3 threads.
But if this unit was open to branch antler bulls and was legal I would have no problem with how this hunt went down. Us as hunters can't dictate where the animals take up residency. We have to adapt to them. So if 334 was an open unit for branched antler bulls I wouldn't question this hunt. And if it was open to branched antler bulls we wouldn't even be having this conversation because someone would have shoot him before. My thought is if it is legal then it's good. It might not be the hunting style of some but each to their own. What if he was on the other side of the canal in a hayfield in an open unit and still a pet like he was would there still be the outrage...no there wouldn't. There would be some cause that is not some hunters cup of tea but still legal. The only 2 things that should matter in this case are the known is that it was shot in a closed unit and the unknown if the Wdfw gave him permission to shoot it or not. In my opinion those are the only two points that matter in this case. We know one is a fact and the second we don't know.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: KFhunter on May 27, 2016, 10:21:17 PM

.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on May 27, 2016, 10:25:22 PM
I'm a little late to the game but wasn't this a high fence hunt?

 No
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: KFhunter on May 27, 2016, 10:33:54 PM
I'm a little late to the game but wasn't this a high fence hunt?

 No

OK different bull then. 

Coulda swore I've seen that image somewhere and was trying to place it.  I read a thread here a few years back with a bull on a road like that and it was a high fence hunt.   
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 27, 2016, 10:39:52 PM
JD....how does degrading the animal help your case ?

How would attaching a hunter's name to taking this animal enhance Todd Reichert's standing as an elk hunter?  That is the question that I am trying to get my mind around.

But to answer your question, this guy never has ever been a fair chase elk.  He has been a plug since the day he was born.  He has always been as tame as a 4H steer and he has never been a fair chase trophy. His value, as such, as a trophy, is not incumbent on his genetics and his ability to evade other hunters for five years.  In fact if he was a fair chase elk he would have been in someone's freezer and this whole sad story would have ended there.  He is not a trophy elk he is an elk with exceptional genetics who would never have gotten to the point that he was recognized as anything but a stupid elk six years ago if GMU 334 was open, for any reason what so ever, to taking branch antlered bulls. 

Now, if his life circumstances were different, and he lived a life of....  By God, this elk among elk has evaded all comers and you finally outsmarted, or gone deeper into the wilderness, and "got er' done"  He is a then a hunting trophy.

Oh, he is a stud, when it comes to his antlers, but is he an elk stud?  Nope, he was a pug.

He's just a big ol' dummy that was thinking that the guy with a borrowed muzzle loader is bringing him another apple.   

But again, I digress.  Killing any branch antlered elk in GMU 334 constitutes Unlawful Hunting Big Game II.  And I say "hunting" because that is what the law says, and, unfortunately Boone & Crockett allows this as as 'fair chase." 

This was no more "fair chase hunting" than my offering to wrestle my mother would in me being recognized as my being a studly man.   

Lay out a scenario in which this could not have reflected ill on Todd Reichert and I will concede that Todd Reichert was not using poor judgement. 

I submit for consideration that Todd Reichert  just didn't give a tinker's damn, or that Todd Reichert said "the hell with the torpedoes, full speed ahead: I have Steve Hormel on retainer" and my shyster has already proven that he is more than a match for any legal issue that result.    I want another 400 plus elk as a feather in my head dress.   

Is he nuts, maybe.  But maybe he deliberately and systematically conspired to set up a scenario, or maybe he was just naive.  But my instincts say poor judgement.  And if a guy that has a shoot through and kills a second elk can live with that....  you do the math.   
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on May 27, 2016, 10:41:39 PM
I'm a little late to the game but wasn't this a high fence hunt?

 No

OK different bull then. 

Coulda swore I've seen that image somewhere and was trying to place it.  I read a thread here a few years back with a bull on a road like that and it was a high fence hunt.   

 Legit hunt (auction tag) legit bull! :tup:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 27, 2016, 10:54:54 PM
Now I'm confused, the pics are not of the same bull?!!? The last pic has an atypical tin, a big one at that!

The last pic is a different bull from a different auction tag.

Keep fighting the good fight JD!  :tup:

What I post as truth are now validated.  What I said was coming has given me confidence that my intuitions were correct.  I am still skeptical that there exculpatory evidence.  But any "fight" I had is over.  The evidence will decide guilt or innocence.  I am skeptical of any exculpatory evidence, but it is that will decide guilt or innocence, if this goes to trial, and I have said such all along:  If there is probable cause then I encourage vigorous prosecution.  Charges filed implies probable cause, let's give me reason to not acquit before you commit me to a certain outcome.  Please.

Up to this point I am satisfied that justice has been done.  I am skeptical, but my mind is open to whether there was permission given.   That being said:  Knowing what I know, legalities aside, this simply was not going to end well.   
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kentrek on May 28, 2016, 12:18:55 AM
The ol bull was smart enough to stay in an area not many hunt...same logic as any of the old bulls I've ever killed...distance into the wilderness is irrelevant to how awesome a particular animal is....this was a impressive critter...maybe not by a measure of evasiveness,as he knew he was safe... but The bull lived to a pretty decent age...

Its a impressive animal

The hunt not so much
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on May 28, 2016, 12:24:30 AM
Now I'm confused, the pics are not of the same bull?!!? The last pic has an atypical tin, a big one at that!

The last pic is a different bull from a different auction tag.

Keep fighting the good fight JD!  :tup:

What I post as truth are now validated.  What I said was coming has given me confidence that my intuitions were correct.  I am still skeptical that there exculpatory evidence.  But any "fight" I had is over.  The evidence will decide guilt or innocence.  I am skeptical of any exculpatory evidence, but it is that will decide guilt or innocence, if this goes to trial, and I have said such all along:  If there is probable cause then I encourage vigorous prosecution.  Charges filed implies probable cause, let's give me reason to not acquit before you commit me to a certain outcome.  Please.

Up to this point I am satisfied that justice has been done.  I am skeptical, but my mind is open to whether there was permission given.   That being said:  Knowing what I know, legalities aside, this simply was not going to end well.   

Then why not let the cards fall where they may?  Why keep harassing and repeating yourself?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 28, 2016, 05:36:54 AM
Now I'm confused, the pics are not of the same bull?!!? The last pic has an atypical tin, a big one at that!

The last pic is a different bull from a different auction tag.

Keep fighting the good fight JD!  :tup:

What I post as truth are now validated.  What I said was coming has given me confidence that my intuitions were correct.  I am still skeptical that there exculpatory evidence.  But any "fight" I had is over.  The evidence will decide guilt or innocence.  I am skeptical of any exculpatory evidence, but it is that will decide guilt or innocence, if this goes to trial, and I have said such all along:  If there is probable cause then I encourage vigorous prosecution.  Charges filed implies probable cause, let's give me reason to not acquit before you commit me to a certain outcome.  Please.

Up to this point I am satisfied that justice has been done.  I am skeptical, but my mind is open to whether there was permission given.   That being said:  Knowing what I know, legalities aside, this simply was not going to end well.   

Then why not let the cards fall where they may?  Why keep harassing and repeating yourself?

I stopped by the gun club after work yesterday just to take a shot or two with a rifle that the scope had come loose on and was asked about what I have posted and ended up chatting with two guys I know about this and was on my mind when I got home. 

The discussion we had revolved around how none of us could fathom how anybody could see a scenario in which killing this elk was worth the risk of potential, actually near certainty of eventual, negative consequences.

You do have a point though. 
 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 724wd on May 28, 2016, 08:14:49 AM
I'm with you right up until this last bit, JD.  It's not always about how steep and deep you go for an animal.  What makes a trophy for you could be vastly different for me.  One of my favorite deer was shot just 30 yards from my dad's house.  I waited less than 8 minutes for it to come into the pasture.  It was the absolute easiest hunt I've even done.  Why is it my favorite?  because it was the first time my daughter was with me when i killed a deer.  We'd hunted a lot but never killed a deer until that day.  She was 5.  it was a reward of sorts, for her spending the whole previous year in the blind and still hunting with me with no success.  He was just a little velvet 3 point, but he's a trophy to me and my daughter.  His antlers are above her bed as we speak. 

So the ease of the hunt is not the issue I have with this scenario.  The man shot the animal in a closed unit.  End of story.  He should face the same punishment any of us would had we done the same thing.  How comfortable the elk was has no bearing on the case for me, only that Mr. Reichert broke the law, and likely willfully!  THAT'S why it upsets me.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on May 28, 2016, 08:22:19 AM
Now I'm confused, the pics are not of the same bull?!!? The last pic has an atypical tin, a big one at that!

Read the text in the post. ;)


The photos make it even more clear that this individual was not in any way going to ever show up in the field as a fair chase trophy elk. 

He is what he lived his life out as, a steer with bigger than normal elk antlers. 

This guy never fought for anything, much less keeping a nimrod from putting a bullet into his ribs. 

He lucked out when he was a spike.  There is no more glory in killing him with a muzzle loader that there is in holding the bolt gun in a feed bolt operation. 

No one goes home after converting a steer into tomorrow's offering at Whole Foods than they do when they send wieners off to Hormel.   For God's sake, let us put shooting a bull in a hay meadow into perspective. 

He never was a hunting trophy  and he never will be.  His place in Boone & Crocket holds no more significance than does a monster steer. 

He is, and never was going to be a "hunting trophy." 

The point I am trying to make, although I admit, clumsily, is that so log as B&C and others recognize a "steer with  big elk antlers," there will be a population that wants to be recognized as a "hunter among hunters" who took it as a personal challenge.... when it was nothing of the sort. 

What to do?  I really don't care, one mature bull is no more significant than another mature herd bull, in my esteem.  What matters is the effort and dedication.  I know the what criteria I use to evaluate a hunter/trophy.  But that is a pretty subjective measure and while it works for me... there will always be those who idolize a hunter by how big in inches of horn. 

But I digress, what ever gave anybody the notion that this would end well?  By that I mean provide any value to a hunting career that was worth the risk of throwing every thing that went before that was of value away.

So that isnt and won't ever be a trophy,  but the other field/front yard bull killed with bait nearby is a trophy?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on May 28, 2016, 08:47:31 AM
Here is the bull I was referring to.




(photo removed at owner request)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bullkllr on May 28, 2016, 08:57:17 AM
Whether it's a "trophy" or not is purely an opinion and I do not see how it matters.

Legality, on the other hand, should be based on the facts and imo does matter.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bearpaw on May 28, 2016, 09:59:42 AM
I personally don't see any value of keeping this open.  The same people keep repeating the same "facts", same theories as to why this happened, theories on what was going through peoples minds, and even speculating on the mental health of the folks involved. 

However, money is to be made by internet page views, and this topic, along with other useless threads like "Bigfoot", "Word Association Game" and "Chain Reaction Game", all generate consistent numbers of views, and money.  I can't blame anyone for keeping them going, despite their uselessness. 



I normally agree with you on most everything, Dave...but I gotta disagree on this one. I don't see a problem with a few threads where folks are having a good time and not starting trouble or endlessly complaining about things. The last 3 threads you mentioned are the ones I'm referring to. This isn't exactly a cash cow for anyone. What I mean by that is I'm pretty sure this forum barely makes enough money as it stands for Dale to not have to pay out of pocket to keep it up and running.


I'm quite sure that nobody is getting rich off of this site, but the truth is that these threads do generate clicks, views, and responses that at least help the site break even financially.  I don't blame anyone at all.  I personally don't look at the three threads I mentioned after I checked them out for the first time.  Sure, people are having fun, but I personally don't see any value or entertainment in the three threads I mentioned. 

As far as this topic, there have been LOTS of warnings (certainly more than a dozen), no real useful dialogue, and a few other threads shut down due to the risk of lawsuits.  Why keep this one alive?  It's been beaten to death, is riskier than other topics, and probably takes a LOT of time to moderate, with nothing of value coming out of it.

Why keep it alive despite all this?  The reason is simple, it helps to generate income for the site, and I don't blame anyone for that.  Without 70+ pages, thousands of views, the site may be losing money instead of breaking even.  Things always get down to money, and when the risk of losing money through legal action becomes greater than the benefit of clicks, this thread will be shut down and another one started.  That's business.  I can't believe that the reason this thread remains open is out of the goodness of the owner to provide a place for frustrated hunters to vent or be entertained.  This site is not a social program, it's here to provide some value to the owner.  Always.

DaveMonti if the sole purpose of this forum was to make money you would see all kinds of irrelevent advertising plus advertising between comments like you see on many other forums. I am propositioned monthly and sometimes weekly by ad agencies who want to clutter this forum with junk advertising. Perhaps I am foolish, but I have chosen to keep this forum different than those others. For the most part advertising and donations pay the bills and allows us to award prizes in the various contests. Many members enjoy the contests, if you do not like the contests then put the "Contests" board on "Ignore" here: http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php?action=profile;area=ignoreboards

The goal for this forum is to be as quoted from the front page "A Pacific Northwest Hunting and Outdoors Resource Site". If we remove topics that hunters wish to talk about then we aren't fulfilling that goal. We do try to keep it family friendly so that the site is viewable by youth as well, it is important that we encourage youth participation in our sport and that can start on the internet.

Occasionally this forum (an internet service provider) is threatened with a lawsuit due to comments made by members (individual publishers). In most cases we suggest that the person who feels they have been slandered take up the issue with the person who published the claimed slanderous material. On occasion when requested H-W has removed potentially slanderous comments and/or topics. Courts have ruled that generally ISP's are not responsible for content submitted by publishers. It should be noted that if comments are untruthful and damages can be proven to the court, the court may award compensation to the damaged party, therefore, it is advised that members only publish factual comments.

Despite our requests to keep comments factual in previous topics regarding this issue, those topics contained so many questionable comments that the entire topics were eventually removed due to the threat of legal action. This topic is based on a published newspaper story, to my knowledge there is no reason to remove this topic, but questionable comments brought to our attention may be removed.

This topic has resulted in another version of the story being presented, there are always at least two sides to every story. Now it appears questionable if some previous claims were true? People's reputations could/may have been affected, it's only fair that all persons be allowed to tell their side of the story, the public should hear all sides of the story, and the truth should be known to all, therefore H-W will attempt to keep this topic available to the public.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 28, 2016, 11:22:49 AM
I'm with you right up until this last bit, JD.  It's not always about how steep and deep you go for an animal.  What makes a trophy for you could be vastly different for me.  One of my favorite deer was shot just 30 yards from my dad's house.  I waited less than 8 minutes for it to come into the pasture.  It was the absolute easiest hunt I've even done.  Why is it my favorite?  because it was the first time my daughter was with me when i killed a deer.  We'd hunted a lot but never killed a deer until that day.  She was 5.  it was a reward of sorts, for her spending the whole previous year in the blind and still hunting with me with no success.  He was just a little velvet 3 point, but he's a trophy to me and my daughter.  His antlers are above her bed as we speak. 

So the ease of the hunt is not the issue I have with this scenario.  The man shot the animal in a closed unit.  End of story.  He should face the same punishment any of us would had we done the same thing.  How comfortable the elk was has no bearing on the case for me, only that Mr. Reichert broke the law, and likely willfully!  THAT'S why it upsets me.

Ya' know something.  You are absolutely right.  I was more than a little aggravated at the name calling etc. and said what I said on that topic as a way of slapping back. 

I was wrong to have posted that.   
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: coachcw on May 28, 2016, 05:29:05 PM
Like Dale said two sides to every story , The shooter has had every opportunity to come on here and defend  his side ?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on May 28, 2016, 06:17:11 PM
Why would he want to?

Even if he's innocent, this crowd would be all over him.

There's no upside to him coming on here.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on May 28, 2016, 06:19:58 PM
And I don't know the guy from Adam, nor do I have any reliable 4th hand info.
Heck of a bull, though.   A true monster.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: CAMPMEAT on May 28, 2016, 07:33:13 PM
So many people on these types of forums, say that the hunters get a blackeye for killing a big bull, or whatever huge animal that was killed. To me, it's the very rich, thumbing their noses at everybody because the can.... It's not the hunters, in my mind, that get the blackeye. It's the rich who think they can buy anything and get away with it. I mean, why does the media even have to mention the guy is a multi-millionaire ? Just to get a rise out of the reading public. :twocents:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: M_ray on May 29, 2016, 10:20:01 AM

So that isnt and won't ever be a trophy,  but the other field/front yard bull killed with bait nearby is a trophy?

You keep making this argument but you are missing the entire point. The majority here take issue with the fact that your friends bull was taken in a closed unit and the one you keep referring to was legal ... its not hard to understand?  :dunno:

If you would like to discuss the ethics of whether or not guys would call an animal a trophy once shot in a field then start another thread  :twocents:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on May 29, 2016, 11:36:17 AM
His post was in response to JDHasty's long post about the Reichert bull being tame.

The other hunt seems similar from that perspective.

Personally, I think both bulls are trophy specimens for their species......   but neither rates very high on my fair chase meter.

But, legal is legal, and I won't condemn someone for picking up an easy animal as long as it's legal.
I know that I have picked up more than my fair share of easy animals but they aren't my true trophies.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Odell on May 29, 2016, 03:32:58 PM
To me Reichert's guilt or innocence is probably not as worrisome as what impact his taking of this bull (which by all accounts appears to have been a "pet", that had a name and that was fed regularly alfalfa hay in a fenced area by local kids) could have on legitimate hunters and hunting in general. Most of what I've read indicates this trophy was killed without any remote semblance of "fair chase" or any traditional notions of fair play or ethical hunting. So far, news of this episode has been kept fairly local and I'm hoping we don't end up with another "Cecil" incident once some anti-hunter individual or group uses social media to feign shock and outrage, which then spreads like wildfire and gets shared by others who chime in and paint all hunters as elitist and wealthy mass killers who care little for wildlife and animal rights.

 Well said.

I agree, it's also worrisome that some hunters themselves have made this such a big deal that it will harm hunters in the end.

It is a sad day when hunters who simply want the laws enforced are blamed for this mess. If we don't have rule of law we lose hunting altogether.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on May 29, 2016, 04:41:38 PM
To me Reichert's guilt or innocence is probably not as worrisome as what impact his taking of this bull (which by all accounts appears to have been a "pet", that had a name and that was fed regularly alfalfa hay in a fenced area by local kids) could have on legitimate hunters and hunting in general. Most of what I've read indicates this trophy was killed without any remote semblance of "fair chase" or any traditional notions of fair play or ethical hunting. So far, news of this episode has been kept fairly local and I'm hoping we don't end up with another "Cecil" incident once some anti-hunter individual or group uses social media to feign shock and outrage, which then spreads like wildfire and gets shared by others who chime in and paint all hunters as elitist and wealthy mass killers who care little for wildlife and animal rights.

 Well said.

I agree, it's also worrisome that some hunters themselves have made this such a big deal that it will harm hunters in the end.

It is a sad day when hunters who simply want the laws enforced are blamed for this mess. If we don't have rule of law we lose hunting altogether.

I suspect that just about all of us want the law enforced.

But, when hunters turn on hunters and don't let due process run it's course, I'd say that's also a sad day. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Alchase on May 29, 2016, 04:53:41 PM
No offense Dan'o but I have to disagree, there seems to be a few who are going out of their way to muddy this whole thing up. There is one "member" that was threatening lawsuits to other members and this forum to shut down the discussion.
So no, not all want the law to be enforced.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on May 29, 2016, 05:07:08 PM
No offense Dan'o but I have to disagree, there seems to be a few who are going out of their way to muddy this whole thing up. There is one "member" that was threatening lawsuits to other members and this forum to shut down the discussion.
So no, not all want the law to be enforced.

No offense taken.

That's why I said:   I suspect that just about all of us want the law enforced.     ;)

I just don't like seeing cases tried on the internet.   I've seen too many cases where a good person was smeared because someone had really solid 4th hand information.

*  I don't know this guy or anything about the hunt.  I have no dog in this hunt.
**  I am all for conducting legal hunts and prosecuting scofflaws.
***  if you're ever back in Kent, look me up.  18-26
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on May 29, 2016, 05:14:03 PM
No offense Dan'o but I have to disagree, there seems to be a few who are going out of their way to muddy this whole thing up. There is one "member" that was threatening lawsuits to other members and this forum to shut down the discussion.
So no, not all want the law to be enforced.

No offense taken.

I just don't like seeing cases tried on the internet.   I've seen too many cases where a good person was smeared because someone had really solid 4th hand information.

*  I don't know this guy or anything about the hunt.  I have no dog in this hunt.
**  I am all for conducting legal hunts and prosecuting scofflaws.
***  if you're ever back in Kent, look me up.  18-26

 Most of us are only concerned with the one indisputable fact, the bull was killed in a closed (as per state regulations) unit. ;)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on May 29, 2016, 05:26:49 PM
No offense Dan'o but I have to disagree, there seems to be a few who are going out of their way to muddy this whole thing up. There is one "member" that was threatening lawsuits to other members and this forum to shut down the discussion.
So no, not all want the law to be enforced.

No offense taken.

I just don't like seeing cases tried on the internet.   I've seen too many cases where a good person was smeared because someone had really solid 4th hand information.

*  I don't know this guy or anything about the hunt.  I have no dog in this hunt.
**  I am all for conducting legal hunts and prosecuting scofflaws.
***  if you're ever back in Kent, look me up.  18-26

 Most of us are only concerned with the one indisputable fact, the bull was killed in a closed (as per state regulations) unit. ;)

Understood......   and I hope that justice is served.   

But, I've seen other cases of good people on here that were falsely accused.   I think I even remember someone trying to call you out for some nonsense about not owning land that you were posting and trying to keep others off of (apple orchard incident).

Now, what little I know of you tells me that you're as honest and upstanding a guy as there is.   But that doesn't stop internet conjecture.

And while the one "indisputable fact" might be just that, if we weren't there it just seems dangerous to do internet sleuthery.

I have a lot of respect for some of the folks taking your exact position - you are one of them. 

I'd just rather it worked it's way through the actual court rather than the internet court of opinions......   but it may be just a tad late for that.     :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on May 29, 2016, 06:22:54 PM
No offense Dan'o but I have to disagree, there seems to be a few who are going out of their way to muddy this whole thing up. There is one "member" that was threatening lawsuits to other members and this forum to shut down the discussion.
So no, not all want the law to be enforced.

No offense taken.

I just don't like seeing cases tried on the internet.   I've seen too many cases where a good person was smeared because someone had really solid 4th hand information.

*  I don't know this guy or anything about the hunt.  I have no dog in this hunt.
**  I am all for conducting legal hunts and prosecuting scofflaws.
***  if you're ever back in Kent, look me up.  18-26

 Most of us are only concerned with the one indisputable fact, the bull was killed in a closed (as per state regulations) unit. ;)

Understood......   and I hope that justice is served.   

But, I've seen other cases of good people on here that were falsely accused.   I think I even remember someone trying to call you out for some nonsense about not owning land that you were posting and trying to keep others off of (apple orchard incident).

Now, what little I know of you tells me that you're as honest and upstanding a guy as there is.   But that doesn't stop internet conjecture.

And while the one "indisputable fact" might be just that, if we weren't there it just seems dangerous to do internet sleuthery.

I have a lot of respect for some of the folks taking your exact position - you are one of them. 

I'd just rather it worked it's way through the actual court rather than the internet court of opinions......   but it may be just a tad late for that.     :chuckle:

  :tup:

 Where the discussion will get interesting is after a verdict is reached. If he ends up getting permission from the state, there will be a lot of pissed off people speculating that the only reason is because of his "contributions", which although admirable, should not grant him exemptions to printed rules/laws that everyone else has been mandated to follow.

 It's certainly going to be a lesson one way or the other. ;)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: mfswallace on May 29, 2016, 07:58:47 PM
First court date on Tuesday, who's gonna be there and report back to us???
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on May 29, 2016, 08:09:09 PM
No offense Dan'o but I have to disagree, there seems to be a few who are going out of their way to muddy this whole thing up. There is one "member" that was threatening lawsuits to other members and this forum to shut down the discussion.
So no, not all want the law to be enforced.

No offense taken.

I just don't like seeing cases tried on the internet.   I've seen too many cases where a good person was smeared because someone had really solid 4th hand information.

*  I don't know this guy or anything about the hunt.  I have no dog in this hunt.
**  I am all for conducting legal hunts and prosecuting scofflaws.
***  if you're ever back in Kent, look me up.  18-26

 Most of us are only concerned with the one indisputable fact, the bull was killed in a closed (as per state regulations) unit. ;)

Understood......   and I hope that justice is served.   

But, I've seen other cases of good people on here that were falsely accused.   I think I even remember someone trying to call you out for some nonsense about not owning land that you were posting and trying to keep others off of (apple orchard incident).

Now, what little I know of you tells me that you're as honest and upstanding a guy as there is.   But that doesn't stop internet conjecture.

And while the one "indisputable fact" might be just that, if we weren't there it just seems dangerous to do internet sleuthery.

I have a lot of respect for some of the folks taking your exact position - you are one of them. 

I'd just rather it worked it's way through the actual court rather than the internet court of opinions......   but it may be just a tad late for that.     :chuckle:

  :tup:

 Where the discussion will get interesting is after a verdict is reached. If he ends up getting permission from the state, there will be a lot of pissed off people speculating that the only reason is because of his "contributions", which although admirable, should not grant him exemptions to printed rules/laws that everyone else has been mandated to follow.

 It's certainly going to be a lesson one way or the other. ;)

100% agree.

I am still naive enough to believe in the system, but my faith continues to get shaken almost daily these days....
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 30, 2016, 12:14:59 AM
His post was in response to JDHasty's long post about the Reichert bull being tame.

The other hunt seems similar from that perspective.

Personally, I think both bulls are trophy specimens for their species......   but neither rates very high on my fair chase meter.

But, legal is legal, and I won't condemn someone for picking up an easy animal as long as it's legal.
I know that I have picked up more than my fair share of easy animals but they aren't my true trophies.

I was wrong to post what I did re: the "trophy value."  It does not belong in the discussion re: the legality of this hunt. 

What matters is the legality.   

Let's just say WDFW wanted this bull lethally removed?  Would letting a South Central Big Game Tag Holder be a legal way to accomplish that end?

No, nO, and NO!!! And WDFW knows this as a stone cold natural fact.  The reason we got to this point is due to abuses that have occurred in the past with big bulls like this one. 

If I were looking at this from a purely pragmatic standpoint... Mr Reichert's taking of this bull left another legal bull for others to chase.  So that could make someone else really happy. 

But the laws must be applied equally.  This bull was lusted after by many, but since he never wandered during hunting season....  He simply lived in a no branch antler elk hunting GMU and as such nobody was remotely likely to get a chance at him.  Many tried to drive him up north and failed. 

You cannot look at the restrictions placed on that hunt and the Controlling Legal Authority, The Game Regs, and say that putting that restriction in place was done without deliberation.

They are not there for no reason.  They are there to point  out that bulls like this one that live a charmed life in a no elk hunting or no branch antler elk hunting area, and there are others like him, are not part of the bargain should you win the draw. 

That South Central Big Game Tag has very few restrictions placed on it that do not apply across the board to all hunters and those restrictions are explicitly and unambiguously spelled out in the Game Regs. 

If it is OK for WDFW to make an exception for the South Central Big Game Raffle Tag, that means it would have been OK for WDFW to make an exception for any other hunter.  It would mean that if the consideration was that taking this big bull would leave another totally legal for someone else then...  WTH does it matter if Todd Reichert took it or someone else took it using an eastside any Elk Tag?

WDFW simply cannot, and would not, IMHO make an exception, particularly on a high visibility bull like this.   

So that leaves us with WDFW making an interpretation on the SCBGRT bull elk tag that says it is valid in GMU 334 which flat out contradicts what is published in the Game Regs.

Let's say JDHasty made a call.  No Mr Hasty, read your Game Regs and it says that GMU is never open for branch antler bulls. 

But then let's say Mr Reichert's hunting consultant made that call.... Given what is clearly stated as the restrictions on that tag.  Let's just say:  I think the response would not be so polite.               
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on May 30, 2016, 01:44:13 AM
Here is the bull I was referring to.




(photo removed at owner request)

Not sure why the pic was deleted?  It says it was by owner request?  This is a pic that is available on the internet in many places.  By posting it no rules of this forum were broken.  This is just another tame front yard bull, and in this case  bait was used. So l once again here is the pic.

If this gets removed again please provide a legitimate reason for doing so. Not a single one of your rules was broken the first time I posted it or this time.

( photo removed at request of owner )
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: emac on May 30, 2016, 05:05:27 AM
Kiticaashunter why do you and all the other people defending TR continually keep bringing this hunt up and comparing the two. There is one big difference this bull was killed in a LEGAL unit. Let me say that again it was killed in a LEGAL unit. This bull was not shoot over bait, but if it would have been it still would have been LEGAL. How many other hunters had tried to get this bull through the years and have been unsuccessful.  There were numerous tags available for branched antler bulls in this open and LEGAL unit.
Oh wait I know why you guys keep bringing it up. You wanna try to deflect away from the issue being discussed. You guys aren't happy that someone else got this particular bull because Todd really wanted to get this bull as he hunted it in the prior weeks and had planned to go back after it with the auction tag.
So quit trying to compare these hunts. One was in a LEGAL and open hunting unit and one was in a closed hunting unit to branched antler bulls which equals not LEGAL.
If 334 was an open unit to branched antler bulls and Todd shoot the bull he did I could of cared less as probably 90% of the other people commenting on this thread

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: TVHunts on May 30, 2016, 06:00:37 AM
Kiticaashunter why do you and all the other people defending TR continually keep bringing this hunt up and comparing the two. There is one big difference this bull was killed in a LEGAL unit. Let me say that again it was killed in a LEGAL unit. This bull was not shoot over bait, but if it would have been it still would have been LEGAL. How many other hunters had tried to get this bull through the years and have been unsuccessful.  There were numerous tags available for branched antler bulls in this open and LEGAL unit.
Oh wait I know why you guys keep bringing it up. You wanna try to deflect away from the issue being discussed. You guys aren't happy that someone else got this particular bull because Todd really wanted to get this bull as he hunted it in the prior weeks and had planned to go back after it with the auction tag.
So quit trying to compare these hunts. One was in a LEGAL and open hunting unit and one was in a closed hunting unit to branched antler bulls which equals not LEGAL.
If 334 was an open unit to branched antler bulls and Todd shoot the bull he did I could of cared less as probably 90% of the other people commenting on this thread

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

Assuming eMac's story is true there is absolutely no comparison between the two situations. 

Also, the Bullwinkle bull would take food from the hand allegedly. He was allegedly in a farmers field when shot where I am guessing there was ample food.  Seems a lot like the pot calling the kettle black on the shooting the elk over bait comparison. And again, in a LEGAL hunting unit, allegedly.  (Trying to keep the defamation lawsuit target off my back) :peep:

I'm not so sure the owner of the forum nor the moderators owe you an explanation for removing the photo though.  I am guessing that reposting it will get you that response  :hello:

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on May 30, 2016, 08:48:05 AM
Here is the bull I was referring to.




(photo removed at owner request)

Not sure why the pic was deleted?  It says it was by owner request?  This is a pic that is available on the internet in many places.  By posting it no rules of this forum were broken.  This is just another tame front yard bull, and in this case  bait was used. So l once again here is the pic.

If this gets removed again please provide a legitimate reason for doing so. Not a single one of your rules was broken the first time I posted it or this time.


This bull is not relevant  to the thread and as stated the owner requested it's removal .  No other explanation needed, please do not post a 3rd time.


Relevancy is a matter of opinion. I think there is alot that can be compared in th e two. And I guess you don't need to give me another reason for its removal. The other pics stay up even as the author was asked to remove them? I guess the owner can make his own choices on this. Discrimination is a nasty and illegal thing, and this thread has touched or crossed that line.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: emac on May 30, 2016, 09:07:48 AM
Here is the bull I was referring to.




(photo removed at owner request)

Not sure why the pic was deleted?  It says it was by owner request?  This is a pic that is available on the internet in many places.  By posting it no rules of this forum were broken.  This is just another tame front yard bull, and in this case  bait was used. So l once again here is the pic.

If this gets removed again please provide a legitimate reason for doing so. Not a single one of your rules was broken the first time I posted it or this time.


This bull is not relevant  to the thread and as stated the owner requested it's removal .  No other explanation needed, please do not post a 3rd time.


Relevancy is a matter of opinion. I think there is alot that can be compared in th e two. And I guess you don't need to give me another reason for its removal. The other pics stay up even as the author was asked to remove them? I guess the owner can make his own choices on this. Discrimination is a nasty and illegal thing, and this thread has touched or crossed that line.
How are they relevant? Here are the facts.
1. One bull was shot in a gmu you that is not opened to branched antler bulls. The other bull was shot in a unit that there were 54 branched antler bull tags given out last year.
2. One bull was under investigation of the Wdfw and the other one never had any investigation.
3. One bull investigation was sent to the prosecutors office and charges were filled the other bull was never investigated.
4. The person who shot one bull has a court date and the other bull was still never investigated.

So the me again how they are relevant. As I stated before is the bull was shot in an open gmu there wouldn't of been 3 threads on this and nobody would of cared

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on May 30, 2016, 09:18:01 AM
Here is the bull I was referring to.




(photo removed at owner request)

Not sure why the pic was deleted?  It says it was by owner request?  This is a pic that is available on the internet in many places.  By posting it no rules of this forum were broken.  This is just another tame front yard bull, and in this case  bait was used. So l once again here is the pic.

If this gets removed again please provide a legitimate reason for doing so. Not a single one of your rules was broken the first time I posted it or this time.


This bull is not relevant  to the thread and as stated the owner requested it's removal .  No other explanation needed, please do not post a 3rd time.


Relevancy is a matter of opinion. I think there is alot that can be compared in th e two. And I guess you don't need to give me another reason for its removal. The other pics stay up even as the author was asked to remove them? I guess the owner can make his own choices on this. Discrimination is a nasty and illegal thing, and this thread has touched or crossed that line.
How are they relevant? Here are the facts.
1. One bull was shot in a gmu you that is not opened to branched antler bulls. The other bull was shot in a unit that there were 54 branched antler bull tags given out last year.
2. One bull was under investigation of the Wdfw and the other one never had any investigation.
3. One bull investigation was sent to the prosecutors office and charges were filled the other bull was never investigated.
4. The person who shot one bull has a court date and the other bull was still never investigated.

So the me again how they are relevant. As I stated before is the bull was shot in an open gmu there wouldn't of been 3 threads on this and nobody would of cared

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

They are relevant in the way that many on herd have claimed shooting the one bull in the field was not hunting. Yet this other tame bull gets killed in a even less sporting fashion and nobody cares.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: h20hunter on May 30, 2016, 09:23:01 AM
It was a legal hunt with no legal issues pending . The owner asked that it not be posted .  They have the right to ask  this and any other website where it is posted .  We respected that request and will continue  to do do. You are the only one making the comparison  and frankly  it is childish and tiresome . 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on May 30, 2016, 09:29:31 AM
It was a legal hunt with no legal issues pending . The owner asked that it not be posted .  They have the right to ask  this and any other website where it is posted .  We respected that request and will continue  to do do. You are the only one making the comparison  and frankly  it is childish and tiresome .

I have kept my posts within the forum rules and will continue to.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: h20hunter on May 30, 2016, 10:25:42 AM
I have again been asked by the owner to have the pic of their bull removed. I'd like to pay attention to my ribs in the smoker, not removing pis already removed for reasons that don't need repeating.  Do not repost.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bearpaw on May 30, 2016, 10:34:33 AM
Here is the bull I was referring to.




(photo removed at owner request)

Not sure why the pic was deleted?  It says it was by owner request?  This is a pic that is available on the internet in many places.  By posting it no rules of this forum were broken.  This is just another tame front yard bull, and in this case  bait was used. So l once again here is the pic.

If this gets removed again please provide a legitimate reason for doing so. Not a single one of your rules was broken the first time I posted it or this time.

( photo removed at request of owner )

You messaged me and I explained that the photo was removed at the owners request. I informed you that I have no idea who you are so your requests to remove Reichert's photos have no bearing. If you are a friend of Todd Reichert's please let him that I invited him to join the forum and tell his side of the story. I also provided you with my email and phone number so Mr Reichert can request removal of his photos if he chooses not to join the forum. I have made it abundantly clear that I am neutral on this issue and believe a person is innocent until proven guilty. If Todd Reichert sees any particular post that contains untruthful information tell him to let me know and it will be removed.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bearpaw on May 30, 2016, 10:38:41 AM
Here is the bull I was referring to.




(photo removed at owner request)

Not sure why the pic was deleted?  It says it was by owner request?  This is a pic that is available on the internet in many places.  By posting it no rules of this forum were broken.  This is just another tame front yard bull, and in this case  bait was used. So l once again here is the pic.

If this gets removed again please provide a legitimate reason for doing so. Not a single one of your rules was broken the first time I posted it or this time.

( photo removed at request of owner )

You messaged me and I explained that the photo was removed at the owners request. I informed you that I have no idea who you are so your requests to remove Reichert's photos have no bearing. If you are a friend of Todd Reichert's please let him that I invited him to join the forum and tell his side of the story. I also provided you with my email and phone number so Mr Reichert can request removal of his photos if he chooses not to join the forum. I have made it abundantly clear that I am neutral on this issue and believe a person is innocent until proven guilty. If Todd Reichert sees any particular post that contains untruthful information tell him to let me know and it will be removed.

I don't visit many other forums and do not know what photos are in the public domain and can be used without owner permission. The owner requested removal so I removed it. Until I learn otherwise from legal council we will continue to remove photos posted by others when the owner of the photo requests removal.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on May 31, 2016, 03:55:02 PM
Any word on the court activities today?  :dunno:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: HntnFsh on May 31, 2016, 06:44:40 PM
Any word on the court activities today?  :dunno:

Was wondering the same thing.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: DaveMonti on May 31, 2016, 08:53:20 PM
Everything was dismissed and the judge presided over a severe dressing down of the prosecutor for bringing "trumped up bogus charges against this fine gentleman". 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: h20hunter on May 31, 2016, 08:58:19 PM
Oh Dave you are gonna kick the Hornets nest !   :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: DaveMonti on May 31, 2016, 09:07:06 PM
I'm heavily invested in pharmaceuticals and am hoping to raise the collective blood pressure of the Pacific Northwest. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: teanawayslayer on June 01, 2016, 06:36:14 AM
Any word on the court activities today?  :dunno:

Was wondering the same thing.
I saw on the county website that there were two court dates in the near future.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: danderson on June 01, 2016, 06:46:00 AM
I hope it gets moved to Upper county district court, I'm have jury duty for the month, court cases on held on Thursdays
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Ghost Hunter on June 01, 2016, 07:51:31 AM
I hope it gets moved to Upper county district court, I'm have jury duty for the month, court cases on held on Thursdays
Somehow I think you just got elliminated.  :dunno: :chuckle: :sry:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Alchase on June 01, 2016, 10:00:31 AM
The defense attorney will probably eliminate any one from the jury pool who is a member on Hunting Wa.

And then sue them ...................  :rolleyes:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 2MANY on June 01, 2016, 10:43:03 AM
I was in Toledo last weekend for a Little League Tournament.

I saw the field was sponsored by some of the folks mentioned here.

Obviously this is a relevant fact.

Just sayin.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on June 01, 2016, 06:47:42 PM
Pre-trial has been moved out to, IIRC, June 21

 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Jpmiller on June 01, 2016, 07:36:11 PM
Do hunting rights get suspended for a case like this? This may have been discussed before but I would assume he can hunt unless he is found guilty.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on June 01, 2016, 07:39:42 PM
Pre-trial has been moved out to, IIRC, June 21

Jet kicking the can down the road so he can hunt this fall!  :bash:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: teanawayslayer on June 02, 2016, 04:45:36 AM
M-Ray your such a little gossip queen please tell me who told me to stop f-ing with that bull ??? As I have said earlier I had no part in guiding TR on that hunt since I had been archery hunting the two weeks prior in the Okanogan. I was ask if I would help gut and cape the bull for TR. So yes I'm guilty for helping a friend.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
that's a funny statement. Who's muzzleloader did he use to kill the bull? I am resending the other part of the post because your right I could be wrong. But I think you may have a twin. :chuckle:.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: time2hunt on June 02, 2016, 04:49:03 AM
Would love it


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: time2hunt on June 02, 2016, 04:57:03 AM
But be careful cause when you post a pic that's not me the other two guys might not be happy. Better get your who's in the truck story straight cause it wasn't me 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on June 02, 2016, 05:36:12 AM
Do hunting rights get suspended for a case like this? This may have been discussed before but I would assume he can hunt unless he is found guilty.

If found guilty of Unlawful Hunting of Big Game II -  then yes. 

And it is my understanding that the judge could also impose conditions on the defendant until this matter is cleared up.   
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: HntnFsh on June 02, 2016, 05:46:50 AM
Pre-trial has been moved out to, IIRC, June 21

Jet kicking the can down the road so he can hunt this fall!  :bash:

I wouldn't think anybody should be surprised by it.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on June 02, 2016, 08:36:06 AM
 :yeah: I'm sure that was his plan all along since he did buy the auction tag again this year.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Woodchuck on June 02, 2016, 08:43:49 AM
Anybody check draw results this morning?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: emac on June 02, 2016, 10:59:26 AM
Anybody check draw results this morning?
Yeah I drew the branched antler bull tag for gmu 334

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Woodchuck on June 02, 2016, 11:21:56 AM
Anybody check draw results this morning?
Yeah I drew the branched antler bull tag for gmu 334

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
Be sure to let us know how the hunt goes.  :tup:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on June 02, 2016, 11:44:20 AM
Anybody check draw results this morning?
Yeah I drew the branched antler bull tag for gmu 334

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
You are gonna want to use a muzzle loader or bow in that unit, unless you can get someone on the phone to say it is okay to use a high powered rifle.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on June 02, 2016, 11:58:42 AM
Anybody check draw results this morning?
Yeah I drew the branched antler bull tag for gmu 334

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
You are gonna want to use a muzzle loader or bow in that unit, unless you can get someone on the phone to say it is okay to use a high powered rifle.
Might wanna' have your trusted hunting consultants handle the call for ya'

After all that is what you are paying them the big money for. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bobcat on June 02, 2016, 02:17:51 PM
Anybody check draw results this morning?
Yeah I drew the branched antler bull tag for gmu 334

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
You are gonna want to use a muzzle loader or bow in that unit, unless you can get someone on the phone to say it is okay to use a high powered rifle.

A scoped 12 gauge shotgun with slugs would work well.  :tup:  (no special permission required)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: emac on June 02, 2016, 04:49:22 PM
Don't worry guys I got everything covered. Been on the phone and Google earth all afternoon. Damn this 334 unit looks step and deep. Time to get into some shape. I talk to a few guides today and I ended up hiring twisted horn outfitter. Check out there website and a the trophy's they have gotten. He told me we should be able to get a big book Roosevelt elk out of there. And that's what I want. I also wanted this hunt to be well documented so I have been searching camera crews to film the hunt. After a few phone calls a Google searches I found my guy. He had a show called trophy state of mind, even though he was usually the main hunter but he told me he had plenty of camera experience.  I told him his stuff looks good so hired him. He also told me he knew where all the good public land was in the 334. So this is looking like it is going to be a fantastic hunt I will keep you guys updated with the prep work and scouting trips on this once in a lifetime hunt.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on June 02, 2016, 06:05:51 PM
GMU 334 is within two hours of downtown Portland using the Reichert Trophy Elk Hunt Transporter.

Take one of these Extreme Western BT Sniffer Outers along and make it a combo hunt.   
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on June 02, 2016, 06:10:12 PM
Don't worry guys I got everything covered. Been on the phone and Google earth all afternoon. Damn this 334 unit looks step and deep. Time to get into some shape. I talk to a few guides today and I ended up hiring twisted horn outfitter. Check out there website and a the trophy's they have gotten. He told me we should be able to get a big book Roosevelt elk out of there. And that's what I want. I also wanted this hunt to be well documented so I have been searching camera crews to film the hunt. After a few phone calls a Google searches I found my guy. He had a show called trophy state of mind, even though he was usually the main hunter but he told me he had plenty of camera experience.  I told him his stuff looks good so hired him. He also told me he knew where all the good public land was in the 334. So this is looking like it is going to be a fantastic hunt I will keep you guys updated with the prep work and scouting trips on this once in a lifetime hunt.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

Can't wait to see some irrigated pastures in your footage. :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: NOCK NOCK on June 02, 2016, 08:39:58 PM
emac, Here is a easy way to get it to an adjoining unit for processing.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: idahohuntr on June 02, 2016, 09:23:20 PM
Regardless of the outcome of Reicherts criminal trial...his repeated skirmishes with the law and questionable actions have clearly made him the butt of a lot of jokes to hunters all across this state.  I may not ever kill a single bull that is anywhere near the size of any of his bulls...but my integrity and reputation will be intact...which is a lot more important to me than a room full of 400" bulls. 

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: emac on June 02, 2016, 09:35:46 PM
emac, Here is a easy way to get it to an adjoining unit for processing.
That looks alot easier than than the Google earth images I am seeing. I could put my 4 year old daughter out there just don't shoot her leg off :D  :D

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: chester on June 02, 2016, 10:28:03 PM
Ok this just got interesting again.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: mfswallace on June 02, 2016, 11:04:23 PM
It will be real interesting this season when all the "called in" poaching cases start happening  :yike:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on June 02, 2016, 11:43:38 PM
I predict a 0% increase.....

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 03, 2016, 03:37:14 PM
how do you guys know hes guilty?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 724wd on June 03, 2016, 03:41:28 PM
how do you guys know hes guilty?

because the facts have been confirmed by the accused.  he shot the bull in a unit not open killing to branch antler bulls.  The issue in question is IF an employee of the WDFW gave him the OK to shoot the bull, and if that person had authority to override the WAC/RCW (not sure which applies in this case).  The permit under which this bull was killed stated explicitly that it was not valid in GMUs not open to killing branch antler bulls.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on June 03, 2016, 03:44:49 PM
Well, of course he's guilty. He was tried and convicted in the court of HW. That's the only court system that matters. ;)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 03, 2016, 03:46:44 PM
 i didnt see that in the story i read. must have missed it, that would make casting preliminary judgement on this guy even worse. if a WDFW employee did in fact tell him he could shoot the bull i would hope all charges are dropped and that emplyee (if in the wrong) faces consiquinses. i would say f thats the case the hunter isnt guilty of anything more than being miss led. the anger should be directed towards the department.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on June 03, 2016, 04:00:30 PM
Well, of course he's guilty. He was tried and convicted in the court of HW. That's the only court system that matters. ;)

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on June 03, 2016, 04:02:36 PM
i would say f thats the case the hunter isnt guilty of anything more than being miss led.

 Misled? Absolutely not!

 If in fact a call was made asking for permission, which I highly doubt is the case, the fact that they even made a call at all suggests that they read the regs, understood the regs, and where looking for some way around them.

 There may have been a phone call made, but if indeed there was one, I would bet it was more in line in asking about firearm restrictions, and not with full disclosure that they were targeting a branched antler bull in a closed unit. :twocents:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Odell on June 03, 2016, 04:04:41 PM
i didnt see that in the story i read. must have missed it, that would make casting preliminary judgement on this guy even worse. if a WDFW employee did in fact tell him he could shoot the bull i would hope all charges are dropped and that emplyee (if in the wrong) faces consiquinses. i would say f thats the case the hunter isnt guilty of anything more than being miss led. the anger should be directed towards the department.

That's not how it works. It's the individuals responsibility to know the laws, not to mention even if he did call, we have no way to know what he asked or what was said.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on June 03, 2016, 04:20:44 PM
i would say f thats the case the hunter isnt guilty of anything more than being miss led.

 Misled? Absolutely not!

 If in fact a call was made asking for permission, which I highly doubt is the case, the fact that they even made a call at all suggests that they read the regs, understood the regs, and where looking for some way around them.

 There may have been a phone call made, but if indeed there was one, I would bet it was more in line in asking about firearm restrictions, and not with full disclosure that they were targeting a branched antler bull in a closed unit. :twocents:
The fact,  you assume.      :dunno:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 03, 2016, 04:34:24 PM
I suppose the argument would then be the official with f&g must have known the regs better and told them they are good. Regardless it sure is a different story than loaded up and driven to another gmus like the herald wrote and then every one and there brother handed down a guilty verdict on.it is written word though so it must be true.

My origanal question stands. How do you guys know he's guilty? Trial over yet? Even start?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: h20hunter on June 03, 2016, 04:40:09 PM
Is he guilty of taking a bull that was not legal per his tag? Yep.  That is pretty cut and dry.

Has ne been found criminally guilty in a court of law? Not yet, maybe will, maybe won't.


Lord Grizzly,  you have a bit of reading to do, unless you have already,  as most points of discussion have been beaten to death already.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: WAPatriot on June 03, 2016, 04:49:29 PM
334 isnt a true spike unit.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: full choke on June 03, 2016, 04:54:44 PM
I suppose the argument would then be the official with f&g must have known the regs better and told them they are good. Regardless it sure is a different story than loaded up and driven to another gmus like the herald wrote and then every one and there brother handed down a guilty verdict on.it is written word though so it must be true.

My origanal question stands. How do you guys know he's guilty? Trial over yet? Even start?

It is written in the regulations that the unit the bull was killed in was closed to branch antlered bull hunting. He had a tag that stated it was not good in units closed to branch antlered bull hunting. That is fact. That says he is guilty.
Loaded up and taken from the field to dress is not really part of the argument. That could be innocent as hell. Maybe the landowner didn't want the gutpile in his front yard? Not the issue at the center of this case.
You can speculate that permission from someone whom did not have the authority to give said permission frees him of his responsibility to obey the law. I would disagree. My daughter always asks for a cookie before dinner. I say no- that is the rule. She knows better- but she asks her brother if it is ok and he says "go ahead". You would reason she is not at fault and I should punish her brother? 

I guess we wait and see what the judge says... My gut tells me he walks. Again...
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 03, 2016, 05:25:45 PM
I think the entire thing is speculation at this point. Not just me. I was just asking how everybody knew he was guilty. Seems like it's all based on hear say. Not sure about your son, daughter and the cookie jar. I'd defer to mom on that one  :tung:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Alchase on June 03, 2016, 05:49:11 PM
You can think all you want, the only "fact" of this that is even in question is if the call was made and if he was given permission.
I would suggest you go back and read the preceding 24 pages.
Then speculate away.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Alchase on June 03, 2016, 05:52:26 PM
Another "First" post again trying to muddy the waters?

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: dscubame on June 03, 2016, 06:01:45 PM
Another "First" post again trying to muddy the waters?

Agree and they don't stand a chance with this seasoned crowd.  This thread has been worked well and twice.  (smile).  Rookies they are. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 03, 2016, 06:35:56 PM
Some first poster may know a little more than you think. Just seeing what everybody else "knew" is all. No muddy water
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: chester on June 03, 2016, 06:38:00 PM
Some first poster may know a little more than you think. Just seeing what everybody else "knew" is all. No muddy water
Seems the most important thing that's been established is a branch antler bull was killed in 334. It is illegal to kill a branch antler bull in 334.
I'd focus on that. None of the other stuff matters.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: WAPatriot on June 03, 2016, 06:48:12 PM
If a unit isn't a true spike unit a branched antler bull can be harvested one side needs to be a spike unless you have the raffle tag imo
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bullkllr on June 03, 2016, 06:49:28 PM
Some first poster may know a little more than you think. Just seeing what everybody else "knew" is all. No muddy water
Seems the most important thing that's been established is a branch antler bull was killed in 334. It is illegal to kill a branch antler bull in 334.
I'd focus on that. None of the other stuff matters.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 :yeah:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Mfowl on June 03, 2016, 06:51:26 PM
If a unit isn't a true spike unit a branched antler bull can be harvested one side needs to be a spike unless you have the raffle tag imo

GMU 334 (Ellensburg) is specifically closed to branch antlered bull harvest. It has nothing to do with true spike vs spike. Raffle tag holders are not exempt from this rule.
Title: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on June 03, 2016, 06:51:28 PM
If a unit isn't a true spike unit a branched antler bull can be harvested one side needs to be a spike unless you have the raffle tag imo

This is a non-factor and it does not make any sense at all. The guy had the raffle tag.
Title: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on June 03, 2016, 06:56:09 PM
(http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160604/9a3f5726bca0c13393b4426ab01458a1.jpg)

Just for the folks who are late to the party. One fact is that the bull was killed in GMU 334. The other fact is that GMu 334 does not have a season in it for branch antler bulls.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Alchase on June 03, 2016, 07:12:53 PM
Some first poster may know a little more than you think. Just seeing what everybody else "knew" is all. No muddy water

Then welcome to Hunting Washington, we would love to hear what you know!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Pinetar on June 03, 2016, 07:19:38 PM
334 isnt a true spike unit.

If 334 isn't a true spike unit (exception early archery) then tell me what it is

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 03, 2016, 07:23:58 PM
Some first poster may know a little more than you think. Just seeing what everybody else "knew" is all. No muddy water

Then welcome to Hunting Washington, we would love to hear what you know!

I'm just the new guy. Ears open mouth closed. For the most part...
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on June 03, 2016, 08:25:08 PM
The hail Mary long shot is that GMU 334 is tru-spike General and spike in the Late General.  It would be a long shot and that is something I recognized early on but kept that loophole to myself.

Is a spike w/a second one-inch or longer point on one side EVER recognized as a branch antlered animal in an area only open to hunting spike elk hunting?  I suppose that if you are already HUNTING IN A BRANCH ANTLER ONLY hunting area, in which true spikes are not legal or in an antler point restriction area then an inch or ?more/less? is pertinent in defining a legal animal as branched antler?
 

This is a distinction that defines the animal down into spike status in spike only areas and up in areas closed to spike elk hunting.  Since we are discussing GMU 334 the answer is only down to spike status is relevant.  Only antlerless, true spikes or spikes are ever legal.   

The restriction on the Raffle Tag unambiguously states "not open to branch antlered bull elk hunting."   In order to cary the argument you would have to prove that an animal that is legal in GMU 334 the animal would have to be defined up to branch antler states in order to be legal.  If not why not? 

What the Controlling Legal Authority (the Game Regs) clearly and unambiguously limits hunters to in GMU 334 is an elk that has NO MORE THAN ONE ANTLER with a second point EVER.  For the purpose of satisfying the law an elk that has a second or more points is a spike and not a branched antler bull in a spike only area so long as the other antler does not branch.

It is defined as a SPIKE in an area like GMU 334 and shooting such a an animal means you shot a "spike."  NOT a branched antler animal.  GMU 334 is not open to shooting branched antler elk EVER.  Period.  Full stop.

In other words GMU 334 is not open to branched antler elk hunting.


Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Jpmiller on June 03, 2016, 08:40:05 PM
As far as I can see it still boils down to what question was asked on his call to WDFW and what their answer was.


Whether or not he knew what the answer was before he asked the question is impossible to know, but if you can't go to WDFW for clarification who can you go to?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: dscubame on June 03, 2016, 08:42:11 PM
As far as I can see it still boils down to what question was asked on his call to WDFW and what their answer was.


Whether or not he knew what the answer was before he asked the question is impossible to know, but if you can't go to WDFW for clarification who can you go to?

The state published regulations like everyone else.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Jpmiller on June 03, 2016, 08:47:22 PM
As far as I can see it still boils down to what question was asked on his call to WDFW and what their answer was.


Whether or not he knew what the answer was before he asked the question is impossible to know, but if you can't go to WDFW for clarification who can you go to?

The state published regulations like everyone else.

I shared the story in an earlier post about asking WDFW about a few of the restriction on legal bows for hunting that I didnt think I fully inderstood before I purchased one . Am I in the same boat as Reichert then?

Assuming he asked if shooting the bull was legal.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: dscubame on June 03, 2016, 08:52:21 PM
As far as I can see it still boils down to what question was asked on his call to WDFW and what their answer was.


Whether or not he knew what the answer was before he asked the question is impossible to know, but if you can't go to WDFW for clarification who can you go to?

The state published regulations like everyone else.

I shared the story in an earlier post about asking WDFW about a few of the restriction on legal bows for hunting that I didnt think I fully inderstood before I purchased one . Am I in the same boat as Reichert then?

Assuming he asked if shooting the bull was legal.

If you do not understand a area in the regs that may be a little grey than yes you should inquire as you did.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on June 03, 2016, 08:58:44 PM
As far as I can see it still boils down to what question was asked on his call to WDFW and what their answer was.


Whether or not he knew what the answer was before he asked the question is impossible to know, but if you can't go to WDFW for clarification who can you go to?

The state published regulations like everyone else.

Again, at the risk of repeating myself:  We are not talking about an intern, we now know that we are talking about Morgan Grant, and his supervisor Rich Mann. 

Let me go out on a limb, knowing Rich Mann and knowing Morgan Grant's rep, any question was answered thus - what do the Game Regs say?  So you have just answered your own question. 

If a legally defined "spike" with a legal second point or seventy points on the second antler is a "spike' In GMU 334 then it means that the area is still "not open for branched antler bull elk."  It is open only for elk that can legally be defined as a spike.

If the same elk were in a different GMU then he is branched antlered and that is not so hard to figure out that any of my ten-year old hunter-ed students could miss that question.  An elk can be legal in a spike only area and also legal in a branched antler area with two steps.   

The thing that matters is that a "spike" is a legal spike and defined as ONLY being a "spike" in GMU 334 irrespective of whether an adjacent unit would recognize that very same elk as a legal branched antler bull.   
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: haus on June 03, 2016, 09:02:49 PM
Is there any case history where an internet forum owner was successfully sued for unsubstantiated statements posted by a forum member?

This isn't Gawker, and these posts are child's play compared to anything you'd see on YouTube, Twitter, or hell even the foxnews comments section.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on June 03, 2016, 09:04:10 PM
As far as I can see it still boils down to what question was asked on his call to WDFW and what their answer was.


Whether or not he knew what the answer was before he asked the question is impossible to know, but if you can't go to WDFW for clarification who can you go to?

The state published regulations like everyone else.

Again, at the risk of repeating myself:  We are not talking about an intern, we now know that we are talking about Morgan Grant, and his supervisor Rich Mann. 

Let me go out on a limb, knowing Rich Mann and knowing Morgan Grant's rep, any question was answered thus - what do the Game Regs say?  So you have just answered your own question. 

If a legally defined "spike" with a legal second point or seventy points on the second antler is a "spike' In GMU 334 then it means that the area is still "not open for branched antler bull elk."  It is open only for elk that can legally be defined as a spike.

If the same elk were in a different GMU then he is branched antlered and that is not so hard to figure out that any of my ten-year old hunter-ed students could miss that question.  An elk can be legal in a spike only area and also legal in a branched antler area with two steps.   

The thing that matters is that a "spike" is a legal spike and defined as ONLY being a "spike" in GMU 334 irrespective of whether an adjacent unit would recognize that very same elk as a legal branched antler bull.
So 334 is pen to branch bulls?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on June 03, 2016, 09:04:52 PM
.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on June 03, 2016, 09:09:24 PM
What I am getting at is that the gate is narrow and I will not allow it to be expanded to accommodate any nonsense.   In order for an GMU 334 to not be closed to branch antler bull hunting Todd Reichert has to show me where an elk that is not defined within that GMU as a spike or antlerless was open. 

It naturally follows, does it not, that if you cannot meet that criteria there is no question that it was not open for any other elk than could meet this restriction. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on June 03, 2016, 09:11:29 PM
Is there any case history where an internet forum owner was successfully sued for unsubstantiated statements posted by a forum member?

This isn't Gawker, and these posts are child's play compared to anything you'd see on YouTube, Twitter, or hell even the foxnews comments section.

I'm the focus of the threats and I am confident I have libeled no one.  Let the chips fall where they may. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on June 03, 2016, 09:13:37 PM
As before, I'm not defending, supporting or condoning Mr Reichert s actions just peering into all scenarios.

So, it's known that someone called and spoke with a well known, ethical and knowledgeable employee under the supervision of another such employee.

It's been identified that neither of them were legally able to authorize such a "hunt", but allegedly did. It wouldn't be the first time or last where someone without legal authority authorized an action they weren't authorized to do so.

How many times have people been let out with warnings? Was there a law created or passed that gave authority to the enforcement side to give warnings when people break the law and the law says otherwise?

Just saying. :dunno:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on June 03, 2016, 09:28:34 PM
A 1x6 is a branched antler bull. My view is "play stupid games, win stupid prizes"! Congrats WDFW  you win a PR nightmare.  The prosecutor (and JD) might want to look and evaluate possible outcomes. 
Maybe Rich Mann and Morgan Grant will accept responsibility and step down.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on June 03, 2016, 09:29:33 PM
I really can't wait for this to play out....

I somehow doubt it's gonna be as cut and dried as some of you think.

But, I could be wrong....
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 03, 2016, 09:31:49 PM
This is a good is discution and agin goes back to my question of how do you all know this guys guilty. I'll admit I'm playing a little dumber than I am but I'll play a little longer.

Humor me. (Even though I'm a new guy ) let's say your standing next to a game warden. A buck pops out of the trees. You say " mr warden can I shoot that buck?" Mr warden says " you bet" but then Three months  later it turns out there's some question  whether or not you could or even that it was out right poaching. What would you say? I'm guessing when it came down to it you'd say "I was staniding next to a warden and he told me to shoot it"

Maybe on the internet some of you would tell that warden " no way" but I bet in the woods the answer would be " bang"
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: fishngamereaper on June 03, 2016, 09:37:08 PM
This is a good is discution and agin goes back to my question of how do you all know this guys guilty. I'll admit I'm playing a little dumber than I am but I'll play a little longer.

Humor me. (Even though I'm a new guy ) let's say your standing next to a game warden. A buck pops out of the trees. You say " mr warden can I shoot that buck?" Mr warden says " you bet" but then Three months  later it turns out there's some question  whether or not you could or even that it was out right poaching. What would you say? I'm guessing when it came down to it you'd say "I was staniding next to a warden and he told me to shoot it"

Maybe on the internet some of you would tell that warden " no way" but I bet in the woods the answer would be " bang"

You should start playing smarter soon. Your post makes no sense in regards to this situation.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 03, 2016, 09:44:26 PM
Ok. Subtitute buck with bull. Make sense yet? Thought maybe that line could be read between. My bad, Internet after all . Lowest common denominator must be factored
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: chester on June 03, 2016, 09:46:39 PM
Ok. Subtitute buck with bull. Make sense yet? Thought maybe that line could be read between. My bad, Internet after all . Lowest common denominator must be factored
I guess what he was trying to say is stop speaking in riddles.
Every time the silt starts to settle someone has to go splashing through the puddle again.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on June 03, 2016, 09:50:47 PM
back to my question of how do you all know this guys guilty.

 He killed a branched antler bull in unit 334.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on June 03, 2016, 09:51:15 PM
Is there a reason this unit does not allow big bull harvest? Just to give the elk a place to get domesticated?  Caught in fences, euthanized and wasted?  To create controversy and "grey areas" to possibly be exploited? Is this effective management?  Are they (WDFW ) not taking opportunity from all hunters by facilitating a "safe" zone for these bulls in an agriculture conflict area?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 724wd on June 03, 2016, 09:51:26 PM
back to my question of how do you all know this guys guilty.

 He killed a branched antler bull in unit 334.

 :yeah: :bdid:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: chester on June 03, 2016, 09:51:38 PM
back to my question of how do you all know this guys guilty.

 He killed a branched antler bull in unit 334.

:yeah:


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on June 03, 2016, 09:53:45 PM
Is there a reason this unit does not allow big bull harvest? Just to give the elk a place to get domesticated?  Caught in fences, euthanized and wasted?  To create controversy and "grey areas" to possibly be exploited? Is this effective management?  Are they (WDFW ) not taking opportunity from all hunters by facilitating a "safe" zone for these bulls in an agriculture conflict area?

 Good question for another thread Tbar. :tup:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 03, 2016, 09:54:35 PM
back to my question of how do you all know this guys guilty.

 He killed a branched antler bull in unit 334.

Was he told he could by the governing body of wildlife for the state of Washington? If so should he be punished for having the audacity to ask and get the answer of yes? Maybe so maybe not. Just doesn't seem so black and white
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on June 03, 2016, 09:59:58 PM
As before, I'm not defending, supporting or condoning Mr Reichert s actions just peering into all scenarios.

So, it's known that someone called and spoke with a well known, ethical and knowledgeable employee under the supervision of another such employee.

It's been identified that neither of them were legally able to authorize such a "hunt", but allegedly did. It wouldn't be the first time or last where someone without legal authority authorized an action they weren't authorized to do so.

How many times have people been let out with warnings? Was there a law created or passed that gave authority to the enforcement side to give warnings when people break the law and the law says otherwise?

Just saying. :dunno:

You impress me as having the experience to have a valid opinion on how this plays out and I accept and respect your court room experience.   

I am looking at this case and threading the prosecuratorial needle is what animates me. 

I am confident that what I have shared as fact is valid.   I have a fairly good understanding of what the Controlling Legal Authority is and I just cannot get to the point at which any phone call could offer substantial mitigating evidence to sway the court. 

But, stranger things have happened. 

Everything else aside:  How could a well respected man in his home community, and a man who is well respected in the hunting community, allow himself to get into this predicament? 

For the love of God man, I gave Todd Reichert the benefit of the doubt, even though the investigators of the 2007 incident impressed me as adamant that they were convinced that "real time" elk spotting was being done by John Wick using a helicopter crew that Todd Reichert hired.  My God man, I gave the benefit of the doubt that Todd Reichert "did not know" that Wick was in real time radio contact. 

So.... no harm, no foul.  "I'll probably never hear the name Tod Reichert associated with any game law violation ever again."

So, what ever trophy Jon Wick is connected with is not 100% legit?  But how was Mr Reichert to know if Jon Wick was in real time contact with the real time aerial spotting that was, in my recollection, going on on his hunt?  I gave Mr Reichert the benefit of the doubt.

But as fate would have it, Mr Reichert's name comes up again and in a way that begs the question:  Is Mr Reichert...  An unrepentant poacher?  Totally naive?  Mentally unsuited to be in the field with an elk tag and a weapon?  Who the hell knows at this point. 

One thing I do know is that there is precious little to suggest that anyone could have ever got the notion that this scheme could ever end well. 

I am 100% confident of the what, when, where and who in this hunt.  I am confident that I can read and understand, interpret and apply the Game Regs and as such I have formed an opinion that is controversial with some - Mr Reichert should be prosecuted. 



         
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: haus on June 03, 2016, 10:02:56 PM
Is there any case history where an internet forum owner was successfully sued for unsubstantiated statements posted by a forum member?

This isn't Gawker, and these posts are child's play compared to anything you'd see on YouTube, Twitter, or hell even the foxnews comments section.

I'm the focus of the threats and I am confident I have libeled no one.  Let the chips fall where they may.
The topic is about Reichert, not you, and my post is in reference to the owner of the site and his stated concern over threatened legal action toward the site due to comments made in this topic and the previous.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on June 03, 2016, 10:04:49 PM
This is a good is discution and agin goes back to my question of how do you all know this guys guilty. I'll admit I'm playing a little dumber than I am but I'll play a little longer.

Humor me. (Even though I'm a new guy ) let's say your standing next to a game warden. A buck pops out of the trees. You say " mr warden can I shoot that buck?" Mr warden says " you bet" but then Three months  later it turns out there's some question  whether or not you could or even that it was out right poaching. What would you say? I'm guessing when it came down to it you'd say "I was staniding next to a warden and he told me to shoot it"

Maybe on the internet some of you would tell that warden " no way" but I bet in the woods the answer would be " bang"

Ranger/Bullwinkle didn't "pop out of the woods" either.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: klickman on June 03, 2016, 10:11:45 PM
This is a good is discution and agin goes back to my question of how do you all know this guys guilty. I'll admit I'm playing a little dumber than I am but I'll play a little longer.

Humor me. (Even though I'm a new guy ) let's say your standing next to a game warden. A buck pops out of the trees. You say " mr warden can I shoot that buck?" Mr warden says " you bet" but then Three months  later it turns out there's some question  whether or not you could or even that it was out right poaching. What would you say? I'm guessing when it came down to it you'd say "I was staniding next to a warden and he told me to shoot it"

Maybe on the internet some of you would tell that warden " no way" but I bet in the woods the answer would be " bang"
If you had an archery tag. Yep you'd be in trouble because your tag isn't valid.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 03, 2016, 10:14:30 PM
This is a good is discution and agin goes back to my question of how do you all know this guys guilty. I'll admit I'm playing a little dumber than I am but I'll play a little longer.

Humor me. (Even though I'm a new guy ) let's say your standing next to a game warden. A buck pops out of the trees. You say " mr warden can I shoot that buck?" Mr warden says " you bet" but then Three months  later it turns out there's some question  whether or not you could or even that it was out right poaching. What would you say? I'm guessing when it came down to it you'd say "I was staniding next to a warden and he told me to shoot it"

Maybe on the internet some of you would tell that warden " no way" but I bet in the woods the answer would be " bang"

Ranger/Bullwinkle didn't "pop out of the woods" either.

Does that really matter?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 03, 2016, 10:16:07 PM
Are you telling me if this was a 5x5 rag horn that nobody gave a name to it would be different ?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: chester on June 03, 2016, 10:17:56 PM
Shouldn't be any different. Not open to branch antler bulls so don't go there looking for branch antler Bulls.
He should be prosecuted the same if was a raghorn or a trophy .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jmscon on June 03, 2016, 10:21:39 PM
Shouldn't be any different. Not open to branch antler bulls so don't go there looking for branch antler Bulls.
He should be prosecuted the same if was a raghorn or a trophy .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 :yeah:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Colville on June 03, 2016, 10:24:10 PM
Are you telling me you are an absolute random new hunter who found hunt wa? Hahahahahaha as they say on espn, come-on, maaaaan!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: chester on June 03, 2016, 10:26:44 PM
Are you telling me you are an absolute random new hunter who found hunt wa? Hahahahahaha as they say on espn, come-on, maaaaan!

Just another new one sent to make a black and white situation seem like all the shades of gray. He will go away and another one will pop up before the next court date.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 03, 2016, 10:26:51 PM
back to my question of how do you all know this guys guilty.

 He killed a branched antler bull in unit 334.

Was he told he could by the governing body of wildlife for the state of Washington? If so should he be punished for having the audacity to ask and get the answer of yes? Maybe so maybe not. Just doesn't seem so black and white


Yup just a new guy. Still haven't seen this responded to yet.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on June 03, 2016, 10:27:08 PM
back to my question of how do you all know this guys guilty.

 He killed a branched antler bull in unit 334.

Was he told he could by the governing body of wildlife for the state of Washington? If so should he be punished for having the audacity to ask and get the answer of yes? Maybe so maybe not. Just doesn't seem so black and white

 Being new to the site and jumping into a conversation 25 pages in, not to mention 3 previously shut down threads, I'd suggest you start at page 1 and read through it, all these questions you are asking have been addressed, most more than once.

 Of course that's assuming you actually are looking for answers and not simply trolling. ;)

 Post 379 answers your last question addressed at me. http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,195504.msg2600032.html#msg2600032
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: chester on June 03, 2016, 10:29:05 PM
back to my question of how do you all know this guys guilty.

 He killed a branched antler bull in unit 334.

Was he told he could by the governing body of wildlife for the state of Washington? If so should he be punished for having the audacity to ask and get the answer of yes? Maybe so maybe not. Just doesn't seem so black and white


Yup just a new guy. Still haven't seen this responded to yet.

Here is a response. If all that is true it should end two professional careers and one hunting career. Seems like someone asking for and getting preferential treatment due to wealth. Rules should apply to all equally.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 03, 2016, 10:29:59 PM
That may we'll be the right answer there
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on June 03, 2016, 10:30:57 PM
Is there a reason this unit does not allow big bull harvest? Just to give the elk a place to get domesticated?  Caught in fences, euthanized and wasted?  To create controversy and "grey areas" to possibly be exploited? Is this effective management?  Are they (WDFW ) not taking opportunity from all hunters by facilitating a "safe" zone for these bulls in an agriculture conflict area?

Is there a reason?  It happened north of two decades ago and it was related to "proximity to Seattle" and mass numbers of trespass.  So it was decided to make this area ultra restrictive. 

But there was still the crop damage from he Colucum herd and so putting pressure on the herd would be sufficient to make a harvest of elk a certainty.  And everybody always understood that it was fair that bull elk were off limits.

It just is what it is and has been.  Live it, love it, learn it.  And nobody gets a pass.

But no.  Somebodies thought they were smarter by half.  You play with the bull... you get the horn.  Live it, love it, learn it.


And Todd Reichert getting the horn is evidently what it will take for everybody to get the message. 

My God man, "I eat elk, but I don't hunt elk." just come over and shoot that big bull... and I could have sat on my friend's veranda and popped a trophy bull and halved it with them.  But it is not legal.  They know it and I know it and our freezer is always full anyway, but I don't have a big set of antlers and I am OK with that.
 

   
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 03, 2016, 10:32:40 PM
My quiestion still stands. Of how does every one on this web site knows unequivocally of this mans guilt. Guilty until proven innocent huh? Lots of " patriots" on here forget the system were built on once they see somthing that pisses them off.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: chester on June 03, 2016, 10:33:51 PM
My quiet ion still stands. Of his every one on this web site knows unequivocally of this mans guilt. Guilty until proven innocent huh? Lots of " patriots" on here forget the system were built on once they see so thing that pisses them off.

You claim to have knowledge of the hunt . So straight forward yes or no. Was the bull shot in gmu 334?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on June 03, 2016, 10:34:37 PM
My quiet ion still stands. Of his every one on this web site knows unequivocally of this mans guilt. Guilty until proven innocent huh? Lots of " patriots" on here forget the system were built on once they see so thing that pisses them off.

 It's been admitted that he shot the bull in unit 334.....guilty, everything else is for the courts.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 03, 2016, 10:38:19 PM
No such thing as exonerating circumstances phool?

Your buddy pope would probably disagree, based on his profession and all
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: mfswallace on June 03, 2016, 10:39:11 PM
My quiet ion still stands. Of his every one on this web site knows unequivocally of this mans guilt. Guilty until proven innocent huh? Lots of " patriots" on here forget the system were built on once they see so thing that pisses them off.

You claim to have knowledge of the hunt . So straight forward yes or no. Was the bull shot in gmu 334?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well  :dunno:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: chester on June 03, 2016, 10:39:55 PM
I'm waiting patiently for his reply. Shouldn't take that long to type one word.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on June 03, 2016, 10:41:42 PM
No such thing as exonerating circumstances phool?

  You asked for evidence of guilt, of this there is no question, he killed a branched antler bull in unit 334........period, can't spin that!

 As I said, everything else is up to the courts.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bullkllr on June 03, 2016, 10:42:09 PM
(http://thisfish.info/media/cache/fe/f7/fef706723939f1dfb388140e837f3b68.jpg)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 724wd on June 03, 2016, 10:54:01 PM
Shouldn't be any different. Not open to branch antler bulls so don't go there looking for branch antler Bulls.
He should be prosecuted the same if was a raghorn or a trophy .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
:yeah: :yeah: :yeah:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 03, 2016, 10:55:21 PM
No such thing as exonerating circumstances phool?

  You asked for evidence of guilt, of this there is no question, he killed a branched antler bull in unit 334........period, can't spin that!

 As I said, everything else is up to the courts.

Guilt is decided at the end of the trial, not the beginning. Even with a confession
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on June 03, 2016, 10:57:05 PM
My quiestion still stands. Of how does every one on this web site knows unequivocally of this mans guilt. Guilty until proven innocent huh? Lots of " patriots" on here forget the system were built on once they see somthing that pisses them off.

I know the facts.  I have a fairly good understanding of what the Controlling Legal Authority is and I have listened to what is offered up as a mitigating factor. 

I say that charges were warranted and I offer my opinion as to how what is offered as mitigating factors should be considered. 

I am very confident of what I have presented as fact, I am very confident in my understanding of how the Controlling Legal Authority applies, I have offered what I think impeaches every defense offered up and I have been straight up on what my opinion regarding guilt/innocence is and why. 

Deconstruct my arguments and offer an alternative outcome based on what you have to offer as fact.   Let us know exactly what the supposed phone calls could possibly have contained that make this a "grey area."   

I have stood my ground and defended my statements of fact and now they have been validated.  I stand behind my assumptions as more likely than not as valid and have invited impeachment.  Have I not? 

Let's have some "put up."  Or just shut up.  Let's have some substance to give reason to juxtapose my facts and what I see as is more likely than not.  Let's get away from what is possible went down to what is more likely than not what went down. 

In other words let's have something that is verifiable as factual that makes this nebulous phone call mitigate a charge of Unlawful Hunting of Big Game II.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on June 03, 2016, 11:00:34 PM
Would you agree that there still might be exonerating circumstances, or are you so sure that there can't even be the possibility?

I just don't see how anyone who wasn't directly involved can be so certain.

I also can't understand why I keep coming back to this thread for a re-re-re-re-rehashing.

 :yike:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: mfswallace on June 03, 2016, 11:01:39 PM
I'm waiting patiently for his reply. Shouldn't take that long to type one word.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 :dunno: 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on June 03, 2016, 11:04:02 PM
Would you agree that there still might be exonerating circumstances, or are you so sure that there can't even be the possibility?

I just don't see how anyone who wasn't directly involved can be so certain.

I also can't understand why I keep coming back to this thread for a re-re-re-re-rehashing.

 :yike:

I am patiently awaiting the Court's decision.   But that does not mean that I do not have an opinion re: what is known.  If "they" give me something to consider that I am not aware of... you know you will hear it here first. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on June 03, 2016, 11:28:50 PM
JD, if the charges are dropped (if) are you going to file an appeal?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on June 03, 2016, 11:34:19 PM
Jd will be in western state and more than likely on suicide watch, when this horrendous "poaching" case gets dismissed...
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on June 03, 2016, 11:35:40 PM
Hell, let ol Tod smoke some Washington wolves he'd be a hero on here!! Grin
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on June 03, 2016, 11:40:47 PM
New member or not it does bring another perspective to the discussion. And is that so wrong? So, are you suggesting it's a conspiracy that this and other recent new members came here strictly by the suspect of this topic? I say take the  :tinfoil:  off and why not be just a bit glad that this site has continued to expand its network and reach.

Hell, a very similar incident occurred at clover springs which brought me here. Was that a conspiracy by those charged and found guilty for me to come here and muddy the waters for them?  Wait, I hear it now, it's the theme song to the x-files playing and special agent fox mulder is sitting here explaining to me the connection between bullwinkle, bigfoot and aliens. >:(
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on June 04, 2016, 12:10:22 AM
This is a good is discution and agin goes back to my question of how do you all know this guys guilty. I'll admit I'm playing a little dumber than I am but I'll play a little longer.

Humor me. (Even though I'm a new guy ) let's say your standing next to a game warden. A buck pops out of the trees. You say " mr warden can I shoot that buck?" Mr warden says " you bet" but then Three months  later it turns out there's some question  whether or not you could or even that it was out right poaching. What would you say? I'm guessing when it came down to it you'd say "I was staniding next to a warden and he told me to shoot it"

Maybe on the internet some of you would tell that warden " no way" but I bet in the woods the answer would be " bang"

Ranger/Bullwinkle didn't "pop out of the woods" either.

Does that really matter?

Indeed. This shoot was planned ahead of time. There were locals involved who surely knew the laws for the specific GMU. It was not a surprise to them that killing big bulls in the GMU they were hunting in was not legal. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bigshooter on June 04, 2016, 12:46:04 AM
Jd will be in western state and more than likely on suicide watch, when this horrendous "poaching" case gets dismissed...

 :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle:

If the case gets dismissed I think JD might go crazy and just keep repeating himself.....O wait.  :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on June 04, 2016, 05:19:29 AM
JD, if the charges are dropped (if) are you going to file an appeal?

Not at all.  I have not seen anything that mitigates the offense.  That does not mean it is not out there though. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 04, 2016, 07:00:56 AM
This is a good is discution and agin goes back to my question of how do you all know this guys guilty. I'll admit I'm playing a little dumber than I am but I'll play a little longer.

Humor me. (Even though I'm a new guy ) let's say your standing next to a game warden. A buck pops out of the trees. You say " mr warden can I shoot that buck?" Mr warden says " you bet" but then Three months  later it turns out there's some question  whether or not you could or even that it was out right poaching. What would you say? I'm guessing when it came down to it you'd say "I was staniding next to a warden and he told me to shoot it"

Maybe on the internet some of you would tell that warden " no way" but I bet in the woods the answer would be " bang"

Ranger/Bullwinkle didn't "pop out of the woods" either.

Does that really matter?

Indeed. This shoot was planned ahead of time. There were locals involved who surely knew the laws for the specific GMU. It was not a surprise to them that killing big bulls in the GMU they were hunting in was not legal.

No the locals were not sure about the rules for that tag. That is why the call was made to ask. You 206er's will not listen to the truth because it's not what you want to hear. Now go ahead and carry on  with your false statements..........
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: chester on June 04, 2016, 07:09:07 AM
This is a good is discution and agin goes back to my question of how do you all know this guys guilty. I'll admit I'm playing a little dumber than I am but I'll play a little longer.

Humor me. (Even though I'm a new guy ) let's say your standing next to a game warden. A buck pops out of the trees. You say " mr warden can I shoot that buck?" Mr warden says " you bet" but then Three months  later it turns out there's some question  whether or not you could or even that it was out right poaching. What would you say? I'm guessing when it came down to it you'd say "I was staniding next to a warden and he told me to shoot it"

Maybe on the internet some of you would tell that warden " no way" but I bet in the woods the answer would be " bang"

Ranger/Bullwinkle didn't "pop out of the woods" either.

Does that really matter?

Indeed. This shoot was planned ahead of time. There were locals involved who surely knew the laws for the specific GMU. It was not a surprise to them that killing big bulls in the GMU they were hunting in was not legal.

No the locals were not sure about the rules for that tag. That is why the call was made to ask. You 206er's will not listen to the truth because it's not what you want to hear. Now go ahead and carry on  with your false statements..........

So is the court defense going to claim that there are reading comprehension issues or possibly illiteracy among the involved party's?
It spells it out exceedingly clearly in the regs and in very simple terms that 334 was a no fly zone.
Glad you showed up to jump in the puddle .


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: HntnFsh on June 04, 2016, 07:19:36 AM
 I find it hard to imagine that the locals didn't know the rules to the area as mentioned. Especially this particular rule. I don't find it hard to imagine them saying they didn't know the rules though. Are they that dumb? Or just playing that dumb? My guess would be the latter. Which probably isn't a bad idea given the circumstances!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 04, 2016, 07:23:40 AM
I guess the answer on the other end of the line shoulda been a pretty simple no then huh? I mean if some dumb red neck locals must know then surely a professional at f&g must
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: h20hunter on June 04, 2016, 07:24:39 AM
Not really.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 04, 2016, 07:26:11 AM
Or should that be part of the narritive? The pro got it wrong too. Who should be held to the higher standard ? The hunter did ask after all. No such thing as a stupid question but there are stupid answers
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 04, 2016, 07:28:51 AM
I find it hard to imagine that the locals didn't know the rules to the area as mentioned. Especially this particular rule. I don't find it hard to imagine them saying they didn't know the rules though. Are they that dumb? Or just playing that dumb? My guess would be the latter. Which probably isn't a bad idea given the circumstances!

If the rules on this tag were that clear one would think WDFW would know them. Yet after a call into the them and a call back from then after they researched it they determined it was legal.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 04, 2016, 07:32:15 AM
Or should that be part of the narritive? The pro got it wrong too. Who should be held to the higher standard ? The hunter did ask after all. No such thing as a stupid question but there are stupid answers

These few westsiders on their witchhunt don't like it when pesky facts like that are brought up.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 04, 2016, 07:33:30 AM
Your telling me there were 2 phone calls! But everybody here "knew" there was 1! How could it be? Just like they know he's guilty I guess
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bullkllr on June 04, 2016, 07:37:53 AM
I find it hard to imagine that the locals didn't know the rules to the area as mentioned. Especially this particular rule. I don't find it hard to imagine them saying they didn't know the rules though. Are they that dumb? Or just playing that dumb? My guess would be the latter. Which probably isn't a bad idea given the circumstances!

If the rules on this tag were that clear one would think WDFW would know them. Yet after a call into the them and a call back from then after they researched it they determined it was legal.

Do you find the rule unclear?

What is unclear to me is what transpired in the supposed phone call(s).

Was there a 'grassy knoll' near the hunt location? :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on June 04, 2016, 07:43:11 AM
This is a good is discution and agin goes back to my question of how do you all know this guys guilty. I'll admit I'm playing a little dumber than I am but I'll play a little longer.

Humor me. (Even though I'm a new guy ) let's say your standing next to a game warden. A buck pops out of the trees. You say " mr warden can I shoot that buck?" Mr warden says " you bet" but then Three months  later it turns out there's some question  whether or not you could or even that it was out right poaching. What would you say? I'm guessing when it came down to it you'd say "I was staniding next to a warden and he told me to shoot it"

Maybe on the internet some of you would tell that warden " no way" but I bet in the woods the answer would be " bang"

Ranger/Bullwinkle didn't "pop out of the woods" either.

Does that really matter?

Indeed. This shoot was planned ahead of time. There were locals involved who surely knew the laws for the specific GMU. It was not a surprise to them that killing big bulls in the GMU they were hunting in was not legal.
How do ASSUMPTIONS hold up in court? Or do you personally know the locals involved and have received their confessions. 
This is an unreal witch hunt coming from many levels on this forum(not bearpaw).
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on June 04, 2016, 07:49:32 AM
I find it hard to imagine that the locals didn't know the rules to the area as mentioned. Especially this particular rule. I don't find it hard to imagine them saying they didn't know the rules though. Are they that dumb? Or just playing that dumb? My guess would be the latter. Which probably isn't a bad idea given the circumstances!

If the rules on this tag were that clear one would think WDFW would know them. Yet after a call into the them and a call back from then after they researched it they determined it was legal.

Do you find the rule unclear?

What is unclear to me is what transpired in the supposed phone call(s).

Was there a 'grassy knoll' near the hunt location? :chuckle:
I  do find many rules "unclear" and fyi so did Mick Cope.  More assumptions.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 04, 2016, 07:51:04 AM
Your telling me there were 2 phone calls! But everybody here "knew" there was 1! How could it be? Just like they know he's guilty I guess

The few urban cowboys on here that have been going on and on abut this on here have no clue about the details. And don't seem to have any problem coming up with lies to support thier witchhunt.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: h20hunter on June 04, 2016, 07:54:38 AM
I think I have read many assumptions and very few lies. Some new members have joined with broad proclamations on clearing things up but have not done so.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 04, 2016, 07:56:41 AM
I find it hard to imagine that the locals didn't know the rules to the area as mentioned. Especially this particular rule. I don't find it hard to imagine them saying they didn't know the rules though. Are they that dumb? Or just playing that dumb? My guess would be the latter. Which probably isn't a bad idea given the circumstances!

If the rules on this tag were that clear one would think WDFW would know them. Yet after a call into the them and a call back from then after they researched it they determined it was legal.

Do you find the rule unclear?

What is unclear to me is what transpired in the supposed phone call(s).

Was there a 'grassy knoll' near the hunt location? :chuckle:

Actually seems real clear to me. If your unsure about something call the experts and ask. And at that point a clear answer was givin.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 04, 2016, 07:59:43 AM
Your telling me there were 2 phone calls! But everybody here "knew" there was 1! How could it be? Just like they know he's guilty I guess

The few urban cowboys on here that have been going on and on abut this on here have no clue about the details. And don't seem to have any problem coming up with lies to support thier witchhunt.


I think it may be time for one of my all time favorite sayings

The truth is like poetry, and everybody hates poetry  :hello:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 04, 2016, 08:01:50 AM
I think I have read many assumptions and very few lies. Some new members have joined with broad proclamations on clearing things up but have not done so.

I gave you the name of the person at WDFW who said it was legal. For most  rational people that would clear things up.  Your twin brother Hasty has said over and over again that other neighbors told the group to stop asking about that bull on their property. That is a flat out lie.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Kazekurt on June 04, 2016, 08:02:02 AM
I'm in the process of buying a house and their is a page I had to sign that says something to the effect of,"this written agreement supersedes any other verbal agreements."  Perhaps we have gotten to the point that this world has become so Litigious that they will have to put a line like this in the hunting pamphlet.  In my profession, we deal with DOT and enforcement officers  all the time when we need clarification on issues that are not clear.   We, however, always  ask for a Written response  and we do not question rules and laws that are painstakingly clear.  Law enforcement  officers are good people, but it is very hard for them to remember every single law and all of its applications all the time.  Believe me, I can ask DOT officers the same question and get Several different answers.  For this reason alone,  it is best to research the printed regulations first and the hunting pamphlet is not even that large compared to the RCW's and WAC's.  IMHO,  I believe the accused in this case knew the law  and was simply fishing for a way around it  and in that regard he may have perhaps succeeded.   WHat is not up for dispute is that he has given the hunting community a black eye by choosing to shoot a bull of great notoriety under  questionable circumstances.   Sometimes it is best to refrain from even the appearance of wrongdoing, even if it could possibly be legally justified .  I suspect the accussed is probably more upset by the damage to his reputation than  he is about any civil penalties that the outcome of his trial could bring  and all the money in the world won't fix that, nor will  The eventual outcome of his proceedings.   My only question is this, was That bull worth it?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on June 04, 2016, 08:07:50 AM
Your telling me there were 2 phone calls! But everybody here "knew" there was 1! How could it be? Just like they know he's guilty I guess

The few urban cowboys on here that have been going on and on abut this on here have no clue about the details. And don't seem to have any problem coming up with lies to support thier witchhunt.


I think it may be time for one of my all time favorite sayings

The truth is like poetry, and everybody f*n hates poetry  :hello:

And right here we have an excellent example of your blatant disregard for the rules.  You read the rules when you signed up for an account here, and if there was any clarification needed the site owner has ask the rules be followed and he has repeatedly stated that contractions or substitutions of symbols for letters in profanity are rule breaking. 

This just illustrates that your ilk does not regard rules as parameters that are to be respected, you see them as something to get around and in the case of poaching this elk you guys were too clever by half. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on June 04, 2016, 08:08:26 AM
This is a good is discution and agin goes back to my question of how do you all know this guys guilty. I'll admit I'm playing a little dumber than I am but I'll play a little longer.

Humor me. (Even though I'm a new guy ) let's say your standing next to a game warden. A buck pops out of the trees. You say " mr warden can I shoot that buck?" Mr warden says " you bet" but then Three months  later it turns out there's some question  whether or not you could or even that it was out right poaching. What would you say? I'm guessing when it came down to it you'd say "I was staniding next to a warden and he told me to shoot it"

Maybe on the internet some of you would tell that warden " no way" but I bet in the woods the answer would be " bang"

Ranger/Bullwinkle didn't "pop out of the woods" either.

Does that really matter?

Indeed. This shoot was planned ahead of time. There were locals involved who surely knew the laws for the specific GMU. It was not a surprise to them that killing big bulls in the GMU they were hunting in was not legal.

No the locals were not sure about the rules for that tag. That is why the call was made to ask. You 206er's will not listen to the truth because it's not what you want to hear. Now go ahead and carry on  with your false statements..........

The locals didn't need to know the rules of the tag, the guy pulling the trigger needed to though, and most likely did know the rules!  :twocents:

So who made the call, the locals or the trigger puller? Did the trigger man set up the locals as the fall guy?  :yike:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on June 04, 2016, 08:14:32 AM
I think I have read many assumptions and very few lies. Some new members have joined with broad proclamations on clearing things up but have not done so.

I gave you the name of the person at WDFW who said it was legal. For most  rational people that would clear things up.  Your twin brother Hasty has said over and over again that other neighbors told the group to stop asking about that bull on their property. That is a flat out lie.

I have said that at least one individual who was involved in the hunt had been told in the past to leave those elk alone.   
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 04, 2016, 08:14:38 AM
Your telling me there were 2 phone calls! But everybody here "knew" there was 1! How could it be? Just like they know he's guilty I guess

The few urban cowboys on here that have been going on and on abut this on here have no clue about the details. And don't seem to have any problem coming up with lies to support thier witchhunt.


I think it may be time for one of my all time favorite sayings

The truth is like poetry, and everybody f*n hates poetry  :hello:

And right here we have an excellent example of your blatant disregard for the rules.  You read the rules when you signed up for an account here, and if there was any clarification needed the site owner has ask the rules be followed and he has repeatedly stated that contractions or substitutions of symbols for letters in profanity are rule breaking. 

This just illustrates that your ilk does not regard rules as parameters that are to be respected, you see them as something to get around and in the case of poaching this elk you guys were too clever by half.

Take a breath, I sent the mod an apology when I saw he edited it. But for all you know I meant freakin and your minds just in the gutter. Didn't mean to wind ya up there was trying to lighten the mood. Sorry I offended you or anybody else
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on June 04, 2016, 08:18:36 AM
Your telling me there were 2 phone calls! But everybody here "knew" there was 1! How could it be? Just like they know he's guilty I guess

The few urban cowboys on here that have been going on and on abut this on here have no clue about the details. And don't seem to have any problem coming up with lies to support thier witchhunt.


I think it may be time for one of my all time favorite sayings

The truth is like poetry, and everybody f*n hates poetry  :hello:

And right here we have an excellent example of your blatant disregard for the rules.  You read the rules when you signed up for an account here, and if there was any clarification needed the site owner has ask the rules be followed and he has repeatedly stated that contractions or substitutions of symbols for letters in profanity are rule breaking. 

This just illustrates that your ilk does not regard rules as parameters that are to be respected, you see them as something to get around and in the case of poaching this elk you guys were too clever by half.

Take a breath, I sent the mod an apology when I saw he edited it. But for all you know I meant freakin and your minds just in the gutter. Didn't mean to wind ya up there was trying to lighten the mood. Sorry I offended you or anybody else

Just pointing out that even though you signed that you have read and understand the rules, you still went looking for a way around the rules. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: h20hunter on June 04, 2016, 08:19:31 AM
Don't get personal folks .
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 04, 2016, 08:23:53 AM
Was not looking for a way around any rules. I made a mistake, admitted it, and apologized to the appropriate party and then publicly on this thread. Your attempt to somehow relate that to the topic of this discution  I think speaks more volumes of your intent than mine. We should leave this alone now and respect the moderators request of not getting personal or petty. I'm willing to, and agin I'm sorry if I offended you.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: HntnFsh on June 04, 2016, 08:30:07 AM
I find it hard to imagine that the locals didn't know the rules to the area as mentioned. Especially this particular rule. I don't find it hard to imagine them saying they didn't know the rules though. Are they that dumb? Or just playing that dumb? My guess would be the latter. Which probably isn't a bad idea given the circumstances!

If the rules on this tag were that clear one would think WDFW would know them. Yet after a call into the them and a call back from then after they researched it they determined it was legal.

So you must have been on 1 end of that call to know exactly what was said by both parties Or are you also making an assumption?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: h20hunter on June 04, 2016, 08:30:58 AM
Your post was a direct  attack on another member. You last post was unnecessary . 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 04, 2016, 08:37:45 AM
Your post was a direct  attack on another member. You last post was unnecessary .

How was that an attack?  I stated a true fact and asked him a question?  And now you are deleting "unnecessary " posts, well mine was far from the first on this thread alone. But the rest seem to remain.  You just didn't like what I said and used your moderator "power" to remove it even though no rules were broken. Yes that is bias by definition.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on June 04, 2016, 08:40:00 AM
I find it hard to imagine that the locals didn't know the rules to the area as mentioned. Especially this particular rule. I don't find it hard to imagine them saying they didn't know the rules though. Are they that dumb? Or just playing that dumb? My guess would be the latter. Which probably isn't a bad idea given the circumstances!

If the rules on this tag were that clear one would think WDFW would know them. Yet after a call into the them and a call back from then after they researched it they determined it was legal.

So you must have been on 1 end of that call to know exactly what was said by both parties Or are you also making an assumption?

Wouldn't it be cool if the department recorded that call and it comes out in court.   :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 04, 2016, 08:40:14 AM
I find it hard to imagine that the locals didn't know the rules to the area as mentioned. Especially this particular rule. I don't find it hard to imagine them saying they didn't know the rules though. Are they that dumb? Or just playing that dumb? My guess would be the latter. Which probably isn't a bad idea given the circumstances!

If the rules on this tag were that clear one would think WDFW would know them. Yet after a call into the them and a call back from then after they researched it they determined it was legal.

So you must have been on 1 end of that call to know exactly what was said by both parties Or are you also making an assumption?

Funny thing about the Internet is you never really know who your talking too. Could be he's making no assumptions at all and was part of that conversation. Could be...
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: HntnFsh on June 04, 2016, 08:44:36 AM
I find it hard to imagine that the locals didn't know the rules to the area as mentioned. Especially this particular rule. I don't find it hard to imagine them saying they didn't know the rules though. Are they that dumb? Or just playing that dumb? My guess would be the latter. Which probably isn't a bad idea given the circumstances!

If the rules on this tag were that clear one would think WDFW would know them. Yet after a call into the them and a call back from then after they researched it they determined it was legal.

So you must have been on 1 end of that call to know exactly what was said by both parties Or are you also making an assumption?

Funny thing about the Internet is you never really know who your talking too. Could be he's making no assumptions at all and was part of that conversation. Could be...

That is why I made that statement. I guess I should have put a question mark at the end of the first sentence though. I would like to see his reply to my question.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 04, 2016, 08:50:18 AM
I find it hard to imagine that the locals didn't know the rules to the area as mentioned. Especially this particular rule. I don't find it hard to imagine them saying they didn't know the rules though. Are they that dumb? Or just playing that dumb? My guess would be the latter. Which probably isn't a bad idea given the circumstances!

If the rules on this tag were that clear one would think WDFW would know them. Yet after a call into the them and a call back from then after they researched it they determined it was legal.

So you must have been on 1 end of that call to know exactly what was said by both parties Or are you also making an assumption?

Funny thing about the Internet is you never really know who your talking too. Could be he's making no assumptions at all and was part of that conversation. Could be...

That is why I made that statement. I guess I should have put a question mark at the end of the first sentence though. I would like to see his reply to my question.

All I will say is what I said is 100% factual and no assumptions were made.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bigtex on June 04, 2016, 08:59:52 AM
I've gotten a couple messages regarding the prosecutors role in this case, which in reality is now the case for all criminal cases.

Prior to 2012 an officer could role up on a natural resource crime (say a poaching) and in 95% of the cases hand a guy a criminal citation with a fine on it and drive away. At that point the individual was charged with the crime(s) on the ticket, he could either pay up or go to court. At that time natural resource crimes were the only criminal offenses that could be handled via a ticket bail forfeiture (fine). For all other crimes (drugs, alcohol, driving, etc) you had to go to court.

Starting in 2012 ALL criminal offenses had to have a mandatory court date. Starting in the early to mid 2000s as courts really started to get backlogged you had a lot of prosecutor offices telling officers to not issue criminal citations with mandatory court dates because is if an officer hands you a criminal citation with a mandatory court date you must have your first appearance within 15 days. In comparison if the officer doesn't give you a citation but rather sends a report to the prosecutor the prosecutor has 1 year to file misdemeanor charges and 2 years to file gross misdemeanor charges. This also helps with the scheduling of court dockets. Court dockets were always packed after summer holiday weekends because people had to appear within 15 days.

What this also means now is that someone in the prosecutors office is reviewing every single case that gets charged, no more Officer Smith cited a guy with a natural resource misdemeanor and it's a shaky/iffy case so lets see if he just pays it. Those iffy cases aren't being prosecuted anymore (in most cases) because you now have to have prosecutor support for everything. So in reality if you are charged in WA now with a criminal offense (anything other than an infraction/ticket) the officer has essentially shown the prosecutor that it's a good case and the prosecutor is agreeing to charge.

Some of the smaller prosecutor offices (fewer every year) in WA are still operating under the old system of letting officers hand people criminal citations which means they must appear in 15 days, but the majority are operating under the system of contact the violator and send the prosecutor the report and wait and see if they charge.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: HntnFsh on June 04, 2016, 09:01:11 AM
I find it hard to imagine that the locals didn't know the rules to the area as mentioned. Especially this particular rule. I don't find it hard to imagine them saying they didn't know the rules though. Are they that dumb? Or just playing that dumb? My guess would be the latter. Which probably isn't a bad idea given the circumstances!

If the rules on this tag were that clear one would think WDFW would know them. Yet after a call into the them and a call back from then after they researched it they determined it was legal.

So you must have been on 1 end of that call to know exactly what was said by both parties Or are you also making an assumption?

Funny thing about the Internet is you never really know who your talking too. Could be he's making no assumptions at all and was part of that conversation. Could be...

That is why I made that statement. I guess I should have put a question mark at the end of the first sentence though. I would like to see his reply to my question.

All I will say is what I said is 100% factual and no assumptions were made.

For you to be able to make that statement you would have to have been able to, at the very least heard both sides of the conversations of the phone call(s)? Otherwise its just an assumption. So apparently you were directly involved in this whole thing in some way. Or heard recordings of the phone call(s) after the fact.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: HntnFsh on June 04, 2016, 09:04:37 AM
I've gotten a couple messages regarding the prosecutors role in this case, which in reality is now the case for all criminal cases.

Prior to 2012 an officer could role up on a natural resource crime (say a poaching) and in 95% of the cases hand a guy a criminal citation with a fine on it and drive away. At that point the individual was charged with the crime(s) on the ticket, he could either pay up or go to court. At that time natural resource crimes were the only criminal offenses that could be handled via a ticket bail forfeiture (fine). For all other crimes (drugs, alcohol, driving, etc) you had to go to court.

Starting in 2012 ALL criminal offenses had to have a mandatory court date. Starting in the early to mid 2000s as courts really started to get backlogged you had a lot of prosecutor offices telling officers to not issue criminal citations with mandatory court dates because is if an officer hands you a criminal citation with a mandatory court date you must have your first appearance within 15 days. In comparison if the officer doesn't give you a citation but rather sends a report to the prosecutor the prosecutor has 1 year to file misdemeanor charges and 2 years to file gross misdemeanor charges. This also helps with the scheduling of court dockets. Court dockets were always packed after summer holiday weekends because people had to appear within 15 days.

What this also means now is that someone in the prosecutors office is reviewing every single case that gets charged, no more Officer Smith cited a guy with a natural resource misdemeanor and it's a shaky/iffy case so lets see if he just pays it. Those iffy cases aren't being prosecuted anymore (in most cases) because you now have to have prosecutor support for everything. So in reality if you are charged in WA now with a criminal offense (anything other than an infraction/ticket) the officer has essentially shown the prosecutor that it's a good case and the prosecutor is agreeing to charge.

Some of the smaller prosecutor offices (fewer every year) in WA are still operating under the old system of letting officers hand people criminal citations which means they must appear in 15 days, but the majority are operating under the system of contact the violator and send the prosecutor the report and wait and see if they charge.

Interesting. Thank you for the input bigtex!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bobcat on June 04, 2016, 09:08:56 AM
The information bigtex posted is exactly why I don't believe the story about a call being made to the WDFW and permission being granted to hunt in an area for which the hunter's tag was not valid. If that was the case, the WDFW surely would not have done an investigation and turned it over to the county prosecutor.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: teanawayslayer on June 04, 2016, 09:10:20 AM
On multiple occasions there were phone calls made to these officials. The same ones you said gave out the permission. asking if the case was going to the prosecutors office. End response " we are interviewing a few more people that will make the case rock solid."
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 04, 2016, 09:13:37 AM
On multiple occasions there were phone calls made to these officials. The same ones you said gave out the permission. asking if the case was going to the prosecutors office. End response " we are interviewing a few more people that will make the case rock solid."

Ya, ok  :o
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on June 04, 2016, 09:31:54 AM
I guess the answer on the other end of the line shoulda been a pretty simple no then huh? I mean if some dumb red neck locals must know then surely a professional at f&g must

 Why do you solicit answers to your questions, sometimes twice, and then not read them, are you simply here stirring the pot? :dunno:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: teanawayslayer on June 04, 2016, 09:38:28 AM
On multiple occasions there were phone calls made to these officials. The same ones you said gave out the permission. asking if the case was going to the prosecutors office. End response " we are interviewing a few more people that will make the case rock solid."

Ya, ok  :ok
truth hurts sometimes. You keep referring to this as a witch hunt. Not the case my friend. I'm going to beat a dead horse. South central raffle open in any 300-500 GMu except those units that aren't open the branched antler elk hunting. Not hard to comprehend.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: coachcw on June 04, 2016, 09:38:34 AM
Well only the guy that made the call knows what questions he asked . If they are trying to say they didn't know it was illegal to harvest a bull there they are just pulling wool / the guy that helps him lives there and is a hunter and has hunted other bull tags in the bordering unit.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: HntnFsh on June 04, 2016, 09:46:13 AM
I find it hard to imagine that the locals didn't know the rules to the area as mentioned. Especially this particular rule. I don't find it hard to imagine them saying they didn't know the rules though. Are they that dumb? Or just playing that dumb? My guess would be the latter. Which probably isn't a bad idea given the circumstances!

If the rules on this tag were that clear one would think WDFW would know them. Yet after a call into the them and a call back from then after they researched it they determined it was legal.

So you must have been on 1 end of that call to know exactly what was said by both parties Or are you also making an assumption?

Funny thing about the Internet is you never really know who your talking too. Could be he's making no assumptions at all and was part of that conversation. Could be...

That is why I made that statement. I guess I should have put a question mark at the end of the first sentence though. I would like to see his reply to my question.

All I will say is what I said is 100% factual and no assumptions were made.

For you to be able to make that statement you would have to have been able to, at the very least heard both sides of the conversations of the phone call(s)? Otherwise its just an assumption. So apparently you were directly involved in this whole thing in some way. Or heard recordings of the phone call(s) after the fact.

Must have been an assumption. But its worth a try to pass it off as factual!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 04, 2016, 10:23:07 AM
I find it hard to imagine that the locals didn't know the rules to the area as mentioned. Especially this particular rule. I don't find it hard to imagine them saying they didn't know the rules though. Are they that dumb? Or just playing that dumb? My guess would be the latter. Which probably isn't a bad idea given the circumstances!

If the rules on this tag were that clear one would think WDFW would know them. Yet after a call into the them and a call back from then after they researched it they determined it was legal.

So you must have been on 1 end of that call to know exactly what was said by both parties Or are you also making an assumption?

Funny thing about the Internet is you never really know who your talking too. Could be he's making no assumptions at all and was part of that conversation. Could be...

That is why I made that statement. I guess I should have put a question mark at the end of the first sentence though. I would like to see his reply to my question.

All I will say is what I said is 100% factual and no assumptions were made.

For you to be able to make that statement you would have to have been able to, at the very least heard both sides of the conversations of the phone call(s)? Otherwise its just an assumption. So apparently you were directly involved in this whole thing in some way. Or heard recordings of the phone call(s) after the fact.

Must have been an assumption. But its worth a try to pass it off as factual!

Your right must have been an assumption. Just like I must have assumed the two calls with WDFW were exactly 14 minutes apart......
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on June 04, 2016, 10:30:17 AM
I've deleted all my posts from today, just like I would for anyone else. they were not reasonable and did not express those opinions of the hunting-Washington forum. I apologize.
:hello:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: NOCK NOCK on June 04, 2016, 10:37:40 AM
lord grizzly & kiticaashunter,

Please enlighten us on the context of these supposed phone call(s)

Early on in this thread it was stated that a call was made to WDFW, then a call was received back from WDFW

Now it is sounding like 2 calls were made to WDFW   :dunno:

Were there more than 2 calls made ????
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 04, 2016, 11:15:12 AM
lord grizzly & kiticaashunter,

Please enlighten us on the context of these supposed phone call(s)

Early on in this thread it was stated that a call was made to WDFW, then a call was received back from WDFW

Now it is sounding like 2 calls were made to WDFW   :dunno:

Were there more than 2 calls made ????

It has been talked about on here before. A call was made to the regional office asking about the legality of shooting that bull in that unit with that tag. The officer told them he was going to check with Olympia. 14 minutes later on the second call they were told they would need to use a bow or muzzleloader to harvest that bull under the circumstances.

It's not just now sounding like two calls happened,  this is what actually happened. Many on here talk about "a call", these are the people that don't the facts of the situation and have wildly speculated about what was discussed.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on June 04, 2016, 11:28:09 AM
Hmmmmmm....   

Just got interesting again.

I wonder if those that think they know ALL of the pertinent facts about a situation where they were not present will continue to play internet judge/jury/exrcutioner.

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on June 04, 2016, 11:29:41 AM
(I'm betting yes)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: benhuntin on June 04, 2016, 11:30:31 AM
This thread is really taking away from the results thread!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on June 04, 2016, 11:36:22 AM
I'm wondering why the case is even being prosecuted if wdfw gave permission. Why would they even investigate? Is it simply because wdfw really had no legal authority?  Sure would be nice to know the exact wording of the questions and conversation with wdfw. Too bad there isn't anyone in the know responding to this thread to put and end to the speculation. ..........
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on June 04, 2016, 11:41:00 AM
I'm wondering why the case is even being prosecuted if wdfw gave permission. Why would they even investigate? Is it simply because wdfw really had no legal authority?

 Compelling yes?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 04, 2016, 11:47:01 AM
I'm wondering why the case is even being prosecuted if wdfw gave permission. Why would they even investigate? Is it simply because wdfw really had no legal authority?  Sure would be nice to know the exact wording of the questions and conversation with wdfw. Too bad there isn't anyone in the know responding to this thread to put and end to the speculation. ..........

I think the last thing the WDFW wanted was for this case to get prosecuted.  That was a decision made by the county due to outside pressure they were receiving i believe . As far a the WDFW investigation, to the best of my knowledge not a single person in the party was even interviewed. That seems really strange to me if there truly was a investigation done.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: mfswallace on June 04, 2016, 12:05:00 PM
I'm wondering why the case is even being prosecuted if wdfw gave permission. Why would they even investigate? Is it simply because wdfw really had no legal authority?  Sure would be nice to know the exact wording of the questions and conversation with wdfw. Too bad there isn't anyone in the know responding to this thread to put and end to the speculation. ..........

I think the last thing the WDFW wanted was for this case to get prosecuted.  That was a decision made by the county due to outside pressure they were receiving i believe . As far a the WDFW investigation, to the best of my knowledge not a single person in the party was even interviewed. That seems really strange to me if there truly was a investigation done.

So, who were the people in the party?

Sounds like Wdfw was trying to protect itself from the illegal preferential treatment it gave to this wealthy individual and in so doing helped him on his way to officially becoming a poacher after other shady practice :yike:
At the very least suspensions should be handed out if not termination to those who usurped the "power of the people" who elected the officials who write the laws.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: teanawayslayer on June 04, 2016, 12:19:06 PM
Ok if we're sticking to the facts here is what we know 100% a bull was taken in a closed unit. Permission given by wdfw? Pure speculation. The courts will do the rest to figure out what really went on. Pretty simple really. i think everyone would agree with this statement. Am I wrong?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on June 04, 2016, 01:09:48 PM
On multiple occasions there were phone calls made to these officials. The same ones you said gave out the permission. asking if the case was going to the prosecutors office. End response " we are interviewing a few more people that will make the case rock solid."
I would hate to see a "case building" due to pressure end up with an officer getting Brady'd. Just sayin'.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: HntnFsh on June 04, 2016, 01:23:04 PM
lord grizzly & kiticaashunter,

Please enlighten us on the context of these supposed phone call(s)

Early on in this thread it was stated that a call was made to WDFW, then a call was received back from WDFW

Now it is sounding like 2 calls were made to WDFW   :dunno:

Were there more than 2 calls made ????

It has been talked about on here before. A call was made to the regional office asking about the legality of shooting that bull in that unit with that tag. The officer told them he was going to check with Olympia. 14 minutes later on the second call they were told they would need to use a bow or muzzleloader to harvest that bull under the circumstances.

It's not just now sounding like two calls happened,  this is what actually happened. Many on here talk about "a call", these are the people that don't the facts of the situation and have wildly speculated about what was discussed.
interesting. So was that bull described as a branch antler bull in the questions asked of WDFW during the phone calls?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on June 04, 2016, 02:00:49 PM
Where does it say 334 is closed?  I would still say that if it is not true spike,  it could be argued that there is branch bull hunting.  It would be tough to convict  (for me) given all the circumstances.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on June 04, 2016, 02:26:15 PM
http://wdfw.wa.gov/hunting/regulations/

If you take a look at the regs, no where do they say branched bulls are allowed. Modern firearm is true spike, archery and muzzleloader are spike or antlerless. I don't see any special permits that allow branched bulls....

So, looking at the raffle tag requirements, they shouldn't have even been thinking about that bull (except maybe they were confused as to which GMU they were in. But that doesn't seem likely that they wouldn't know they were in 334).

I'm not sure why I'm even posting here....... :-\
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Blacktail Sniper on June 04, 2016, 02:30:13 PM
Where does it say 334 is closed?  I would still say that if it is not true spike,  it could be argued that there is branch bull hunting.  It would be tough to convict  (for me) given all the circumstances.

Hope this answers your question. Pretty sure these were posted eariler in the thread but are buried way back.

Shots from the 2015 regs covering all three methods of hunting elk, and the raffle page rules for elk. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: NOCK NOCK on June 04, 2016, 02:49:19 PM
lord grizzly & kiticaashunter,

Please enlighten us on the context of these supposed phone call(s)

Early on in this thread it was stated that a call was made to WDFW, then a call was received back from WDFW

Now it is sounding like 2 calls were made to WDFW   :dunno:

Were there more than 2 calls made ????

It has been talked about on here before. A call was made to the regional office asking about the legality of shooting that bull in that unit with that tag. The officer told them he was going to check with Olympia. 14 minutes later on the second call they were told they would need to use a bow or muzzleloader to harvest that bull under the circumstances.

It's not just now sounding like two calls happened,  this is what actually happened. Many on here talk about "a call", these are the people that don't the facts of the situation and have wildly speculated about what was discussed.


1. The ? I was asking was the directions (incoming vs outgoing) of the 2 calls.

2. As far as the phone calls....I don't really care WHAT was discussed, TR knew he could not shoot that bull, to even make that 1st call reeks of a poor attempt to twist the rules in his favor...very un-sportsman like, and definitely not the actions of a person who calls himself a "hunter" (To me, He is just a killer)

3. This right here in bold, from you kiticaashunter, has convinced me 100% that Mr. Reichert and/or his crew are 100% guilty of; 
 
a.  Knowing they could not shoot this animal in 334, thus the call. That is SAD!!! For a guy who has hunted/shot many animals in his lifetime, and calls himself a hunter/sportsman. I agree with JDHasty, HOW COULD YOU CALL YOURSELF A HUNTER and expect this scenario to EVER end well?

b. Being the stereotypical wealthy big game shooter, "Money will buy me everything, and in the end whether right or wrong, ethical or not, fair chase or not, I (___________________) will have the animal that I WANTED hanging on my wall" 

c.  Zero respect from TRUE sportsman who actually hunt



I personally would rather be remembered for being a good guy, not one who twisted things around to get his way, those are the actions of a spoiled child, not a grown man who is supposed to be a sportsman.  :twocents: :twocents:

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on June 04, 2016, 03:02:08 PM
So if I'm defending I would ask simple yes/no questions.  (Photo from this thread http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php?topic=101806.0)
Is this a branched antler bull?
Is this legal in 334?
Is 334 open to branch bulls?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: fishngamereaper on June 04, 2016, 03:13:39 PM
So if I'm defending I would ask simple yes/no questions.  (Photo from this thread http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php?topic=101806.0)
Is this a branched antler bull?
Is this legal in 334?
Is 334 open to branch bulls?

No
Yes
No
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: chester on June 04, 2016, 03:19:30 PM
So if I'm defending I would ask simple yes/no questions.  (Photo from this thread http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php?topic=101806.0)
Is this a branched antler bull?
Is this legal in 334?
Is 334 open to branch bulls?
No
Yes
No

How is this relevant ? Pretty sure the bull this thread is about had forks above the ears on both sides.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on June 04, 2016, 03:20:18 PM
So if I'm defending I would ask simple yes/no questions.  (Photo from this thread http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php?topic=101806.0)
Is this a branched antler bull?
Is this legal in 334?
Is 334 open to branch bulls?

No
Yes
No
Thats not a branched bull?  I would love to see a jury of six come to agreement on your answers. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on June 04, 2016, 03:23:51 PM
So if I'm defending I would ask simple yes/no questions.  (Photo from this thread http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php?topic=101806.0)
Is this a branched antler bull?
Is this legal in 334?
Is 334 open to branch bulls?
No
Yes
No

How is this relevant ? Pretty sure the bull this thread is about had forks above the ears on both sides.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The department has some more than confusing management schemes that shape the regulations.  WDFW gets what they asked for, a PR nightmare and a bunch of wasted public funds.  I would guess the money spent, from investigation to prosecution nullifies any proceeds from the raffle.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 04, 2016, 03:27:11 PM
So if I'm defending I would ask simple yes/no questions.  (Photo from this thread http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php?topic=101806.0)
Is this a branched antler bull?
Is this legal in 334?
Is 334 open to branch bulls?
No
Yes
No

How is this relevant ? Pretty sure the bull this thread is about had forks above the ears on both sides.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The relevance is there's a bull with branching antler that would be legal to harvest in that unit since it's not a true spike unit. Yes it's a fine print argument but couple it with the go ahead from olimpia and you've got a case a good lawyer can win. Pretty sure that's where Tbar is going with it.  Correct me if I'm wrong tbar
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on June 04, 2016, 03:32:52 PM
It's a case that should not even be tried in my opinion.  What I would like is clarity from a department that can't answer (definitively) many questions about their own rules and regulations.  This same scenario has played out before and should have played out on another 2015 hunt.  The department doesn't know their own rules, how can they expect ANYONE else(except JD) to definitively understand them.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 04, 2016, 03:33:02 PM
So if I'm defending I would ask simple yes/no questions.  (Photo from this thread http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php?topic=101806.0)
Is this a branched antler bull?
Is this legal in 334?
Is 334 open to branch bulls?
No
Yes
No

How is this relevant ? Pretty sure the bull this thread is about had forks above the ears on both sides.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The department has some more than confusing management schemes that shape the regulations.  WDFW gets what they asked for, a PR nightmare and a bunch of wasted public funds.  I would guess the money spent, from investigation to prosecution nullifies any proceeds from the raffle.

That's a good point. But hey, at least there not spending it on wolves
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on June 04, 2016, 03:35:02 PM
What is WDFW's definition of a spike bull and what is their definition of a branch antlered bull? By definition, I'm pretty sure that bull in the picture is  a spike.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on June 04, 2016, 03:35:49 PM
I don't know the tag holder in any way shape or form, but feel the only thing he should get from the WDFW is an apology.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: fishngamereaper on June 04, 2016, 03:37:03 PM
So if I'm defending I would ask simple yes/no questions.  (Photo from this thread http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php?topic=101806.0)
Is this a branched antler bull?
Is this legal in 334?
Is 334 open to branch bulls?

No
Yes
No
Thats not a branched bull?  I would love to see a jury of six come to agreement on your answers.

If you killed that bull in 334 you going to call it a 5 by 2 or a spike by 5 . By definition its a legal spike. Calling it a branched antler bull for the sake of trying to justify hunting branched bulls in 334 is just trying to twist the wording in the regs to suit the hunting needs of one individual.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on June 04, 2016, 03:38:42 PM
What is WDFW's definition of a spike bull and what is their definition of a branch antlered bull? By definition, I'm pretty sure that bull in the picture is  a spike.
Jackalope, it's definitely a fine print and interpretation  argument.  That does not take away from it's validity.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 04, 2016, 03:40:30 PM
So if I'm defending I would ask simple yes/no questions.  (Photo from this thread http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php?topic=101806.0)
Is this a branched antler bull?
Is this legal in 334?
Is 334 open to branch bulls?

No
Yes
No
Thats not a branched bull?  I would love to see a jury of six come to agreement on your answers.

If you killed that bull in 334 you going to call it a 5 by 2 or a spike by 5 . By definition its a legal spike. Calling it a branched antler bull for the sake of trying to justify hunting branched bulls in 334 is just trying to twist the wording in the regs to suit the hunting needs of one individual.


You may have just explained it the best on how unclear the regs and peramiters of the raffle tag are. The way there written could not even been interpreted by the department that wrote them, thus the situation we have here. Just as clear as mud
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JLS on June 04, 2016, 03:41:16 PM
This thread has reached the level of a bad case of gonorrhea, with a side case of herpes.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: RELV on June 04, 2016, 03:43:16 PM
That Bull in the picture is also legal in a 3PT or better area, like GMU 652.  So, I would call it a branch antlered Bull and not a spike.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 04, 2016, 03:46:12 PM
This thread has reached the level of a bad case of gonorrhea, with a side case of herpes.

How does this add to the thread. I e seen a few posts taken down in the short time I've been on here and even had one of mine edited. This should come down . It's far more offensive than what's already been taken down
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on June 04, 2016, 03:51:51 PM
This thread has reached the level of a bad case of gonorrhea, with a side case of herpes.
JLS maybe you can provide clarity?  How do you quantify your analysis?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: teanawayslayer on June 04, 2016, 04:08:36 PM
So if I'm defending I would ask simple yes/no questions.  (Photo from this thread http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php?topic=101806.0)
Is this a branched antler bull?
Is this legal in 334?
Is 334 open to branch bulls?

No
Yes
No
Thats not a branched bull?  I would love to see a jury of six come to agreement on your answers.

If you killed that bull in 334 you going to call it a 5 by 2 or a spike by 5 . By definition its a legal spike. Calling it a branched antler bull for the sake of trying to justify hunting branched bulls in 334 is just trying to twist the wording in the regs to suit the hunting needs of one individual.


You may have just explained it the best on how unclear the regs and peramiters of the raffle tag are. The way there written could not even been interpreted by the department that wrote them, thus the situation we have here. Just as clear as mud
its not hard to figure out at all. We all abide by the same rules if not we face the penalty of the law. Ignorance is bliss.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on June 04, 2016, 04:11:56 PM
So if I'm defending I would ask simple yes/no questions.  (Photo from this thread http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php?topic=101806.0)
Is this a branched antler bull?
Is this legal in 334?
Is 334 open to branch bulls?

No
Yes
No
Thats not a branched bull?  I would love to see a jury of six come to agreement on your answers.

If you killed that bull in 334 you going to call it a 5 by 2 or a spike by 5 . By definition its a legal spike. Calling it a branched antler bull for the sake of trying to justify hunting branched bulls in 334 is just trying to twist the wording in the regs to suit the hunting needs of one individual.

I covered that topic in depth yesterday and a bull elk must be able to be defined as a spike in GMU 334 in order to be legal.  By default then GMU 334 is not open for branched antler elk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JLS on June 04, 2016, 04:14:36 PM
This thread has reached the level of a bad case of gonorrhea, with a side case of herpes.
JLS maybe you can provide clarity?  How do you quantify your analysis?

Because at this point it has gravitated to a continued back and forth of hypotheticals, allegations, and pictures of bull elk that have no direct bearing on the case at hand.  It's continued speculation about a telephone conversation when we know full well that the other party isn't going to take part in the conversation.  All of this will come out, under oath, in a courtroom.  To continue to speculate and make one sided allegations is ridiculous.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on June 04, 2016, 04:22:51 PM
I was hoping you could provide legal clarity (rcw, wac,case law).
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JLS on June 04, 2016, 04:25:11 PM
I was hoping you could provide legal clarity (rcw, wac,case law).

for what?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on June 04, 2016, 04:28:52 PM
Something that would definitively say that 334 would not be a huntable unit to auction/raffle tag holders.  I just don't think it's as cut and dry (illegal) as many (not you) are claiming. I apologize if the spike pic has zero meaning to this thread.  Mods feel free to delete.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on June 04, 2016, 04:31:09 PM
So if I'm defending I would ask simple yes/no questions.  (Photo from this thread http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php?topic=101806.0)
Is this a branched antler bull?
Is this legal in 334?
Is 334 open to branch bulls?

No
Yes
No
Thats not a branched bull?  I would love to see a jury of six come to agreement on your answers.
trying to justify hunting branched bulls in 334 is just trying to twist the wording in the regs to suit the hunting needs of one individual.

 +1
Title: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on June 04, 2016, 04:37:07 PM
What is WDFW's definition of a spike bull and what is their definition of a branch antlered bull? By definition, I'm pretty sure that bull in the picture is  a spike.
Jackalope, it's definitely a fine print and interpretation  argument.  That does not take away from it's validity.


Per the reg's, page 52, GMU 334 is a true spike unit.

http://wdfw.wa.gov/publications/01712/wdfw01712.pdf

(http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160604/07eb6bba7fb845a4d7091cc0f8c0f299.jpg)

(http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160604/6258c0e5d816bcee872ac56d674deca8.jpg)

(http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160604/fcb0f34e7314e9075f4e8cd6c2673433.jpg)

With all due respect, please explain to me how that could possibly, ever, in a month of Sunday's, be a matter of interpretation. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on June 04, 2016, 04:38:51 PM
That Bull in the picture is also legal in a 3PT or better area, like GMU 652.  So, I would call it a branch antlered Bull and not a spike.

This was not 652. Or any other gmu where 3 point Bulls are even a consideration.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Pinetar on June 04, 2016, 04:39:31 PM
NO According to WDFW and the regs it is a spike. Refer to page 49 in regs if you don't understand and are confused of the difference. Theirs some really cool pics to look at as well.

True Spike Bull Restrictions: Bull elk taken in
these units (GMUs 251, 328-335) must
have both antlers with no branching
originating more than four inches above
where the antlers attach to the skull

Riechert's Bull clearly has branching on both antlers that are more than 4 inches above his skull.

NO It is illegal to shoot a 1x5 in 334 with any weapon and all seasons except with a bow during Sept. archery season.

NO AGAIN!!! Again, you can shoot that 1x5 spike with a bow during Sept. archery season but if you shoot a 2x2 or larger with any weapon or any tag it becomes illegal as it would clearly become a branched bull by looking at or reading the regs.

334 is TRUE SPIKE ONLY (meaning 1x1) EXCEPT SEPT ARCHERY where you can legally shoot a 1x?

I can't find anywhere in the regs where it is legal to shoot a branched bull (meaning 2x2 or larger) in Unit 334. If I am missing something, PLEASE show me! To me the regs are not confusing at all on this subject.

TBar- In your eyes is unit 334 True Spike or not? In your eyes can you legally shoot that 1x5 in 334 with a muzzy or rifle?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on June 04, 2016, 04:40:38 PM
So they should be pursuing charges on every non true spike taken in archery and muzzy.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on June 04, 2016, 04:40:59 PM
Something that would definitively say that 334 would not be a huntable unit to auction/raffle tag holders.

 The regs clearly say that raffle tag is valid in any unit for that region until the end of the year, except those GMU's closed to elk hunting or closed to branch antlered bull elk hunting

 Definitive to everyone not looking for some way, any way, to justify killing that bull. :dunno:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on June 04, 2016, 04:42:17 PM
Jackalope, in the 2015 Game Regs it is listed on P51 a Spike or antlerless for the Archery General
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on June 04, 2016, 04:43:45 PM
So they should be pursuing charges on every non true spike taken in archery and muzzy.

 I can appreciate your need for a clear understanding Tbar, but this has absolutely nothing to do with this thread or situation. ;)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on June 04, 2016, 04:44:36 PM
NO According to WDFW and the regs it is a spike. Refer to page 49 in regs if you don't understand and are confused of the difference. Theirs some really cool pics to look at as well.

True Spike Bull Restrictions: Bull elk taken in
these units (GMUs 251, 328-335) must
have both antlers with no branching
originating more than four inches above
where the antlers attach to the skull

Riechert's Bull clearly has branching on both antlers that are more than 4 inches above his skull.

NO It is illegal to shoot a 1x5 in 334 with any weapon and all seasons except with a bow during Sept. archery season.

NO AGAIN!!! Again, you can shoot that 1x5 spike with a bow during Sept. archery season but if you shoot a 2x2 or larger with any weapon or any tag it becomes illegal as it would clearly become a branched bull by looking at or reading the regs.

334 is TRUE SPIKE ONLY (meaning 1x1) EXCEPT SEPT ARCHERY where you can legally shoot a 1x?

I can't find anywhere in the regs where it is legal to shoot a branched bull (meaning 2x2 or larger) in Unit 334. If I am missing something, PLEASE show me! To me the regs are not confusing at all on this subject.

TBar- In your eyes is unit 334 True Spike or not? In your eyes can you legally shoot that 1x5 in 334 with a muzzy or rifle?


What you are saying is a stone cold natural fact! 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 04, 2016, 04:49:31 PM
Don't forget guys if your not clear on any regulations you can always call fish and game and ask....oh wait ....
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on June 04, 2016, 04:50:25 PM
Don't forget guys if your not clear on any regulations you can always call fish and game and ask....oh wait ....
:chuckle:

 Sadly this is true in more ways than one, WDFG was reliable as I remember it, WDFW not so much!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: teanawayslayer on June 04, 2016, 05:00:56 PM
Something that would definitively say that 334 would not be a huntable unit to auction/raffle tag holders.  I just don't think it's as cut and dry (illegal) as many (not you) are claiming. I apologize if the spike pic has zero meaning to this thread.  Mods feel free to delete.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: teanawayslayer on June 04, 2016, 05:01:45 PM
Pretty simple
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on June 04, 2016, 05:03:24 PM
Pretty simple

  :chuckle: It would seem!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on June 04, 2016, 05:04:14 PM
Jackalope, in the 2015 Game Regs it is listed on P51 a Spike or antlerless for the Archery General

(http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160605/2e45664d8e723e64f4cc716fd827ef2c.jpg)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 04, 2016, 05:05:02 PM
Your absolutely right phool that is an important distinction to make. That G changing to a W had more reprocutions than I'd say most hunters realize.
Title: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on June 04, 2016, 05:06:12 PM
Let's try it this way. It is a spike unit, even if it's not a true spike unit, even though it clearly states it is a true spike unit.
Definition of a Spike:

(http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160605/74df0cbff6549e800a8901c58bb901b4.jpg)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 04, 2016, 05:07:34 PM
Isn't it not a true spike unit for archery?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on June 04, 2016, 05:13:37 PM
If 334 were open for branch bulls, is there anyone that believes that bull would have been alive for the raffle tag holder to take?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JimmyHoffa on June 04, 2016, 05:14:22 PM
using those spike bull definitions all one has to do is wait until the bull lowers his head far enough down such that the antlers are no longer 'above' the ear.  :rolleyes:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on June 04, 2016, 05:14:54 PM
(http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160605/4123fe9d09cce47cd3ce4b9ca26eaae7.jpg)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: NOCK NOCK on June 04, 2016, 06:18:49 PM
If 334 were open for branch bulls, is there anyone that believes that bull would have been alive for the raffle tag holder to take?


BINGO

 :tup: :tup:   Good one Curly
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: emac on June 04, 2016, 06:33:59 PM
If 334 were open for branch bulls, is there anyone that believes that bull would have been alive for the raffle tag holder to take?
I made that point like 500 posts ago but it seems like everyone missed it. If 334 was open to branched antler bulls that thing would of been dead along time ago

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: CAMPMEAT on June 04, 2016, 07:12:17 PM
 :beatdeadhorse: :beatdeadhorse: :beatdeadhorse: :beatdeadhorse: :beatdeadhorse: :beatdeadhorse: :beatdeadhorse: :beatdeadhorse: :beatdeadhorse: :beatdeadhorse:

More like beating a dead elk story to death...........................no wonder I don't frequent this site very often any more..you guys are worse than a bunch of old women.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Ridgeratt on June 04, 2016, 07:31:40 PM
:beatdeadhorse: :beatdeadhorse: :beatdeadhorse: :beatdeadhorse: :beatdeadhorse: :beatdeadhorse: :beatdeadhorse: :beatdeadhorse: :beatdeadhorse: :beatdeadhorse:

More like beating a dead elk story to death...........................no wonder I don't frequent this site very often any more..you guys are worse than a bunch of old women.

Nice Camp I was wondering just how much timber would need to be cut to prop up this dead horse.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: CAMPMEAT on June 04, 2016, 07:37:07 PM
:beatdeadhorse: :beatdeadhorse: :beatdeadhorse: :beatdeadhorse: :beatdeadhorse: :beatdeadhorse: :beatdeadhorse: :beatdeadhorse: :beatdeadhorse: :beatdeadhorse:

More like beating a dead elk story to death...........................no wonder I don't frequent this site very often any more..you guys are worse than a bunch of old women.

Nice Camp I was wondering just how much timber would need to be cut to prop up this dead horse.

,
Thanks. It's 110 % out of my realm of thinking, why anybody with normal thinking, would carry on about something like this. Gorillas are the new fad now anyhow.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on June 04, 2016, 07:40:09 PM
Lions, bison, elk & gorillas oh my... :chuckle: all these pets killed in the last year is a damn shame. :bdid: people need to learn to put a leash and a fence around them for their own safety. :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: CAMPMEAT on June 04, 2016, 07:42:22 PM
Lions, bison, elk & gorillas oh my... :chuckle: all these pets killed in the last year is a damn shame. :bdid: people need to learn to put a leash and a fence around them for their own safety. :chuckle:

10-4 Plat.....
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on June 04, 2016, 07:58:08 PM
I remember not to many years ago a certain member on her was charged with shooting a 2 point muley, oh boy did the gammies/ legal system go after him with zealous. But someone with lots of extra change in thier pocket sure makes the legal system turn a lot slower! Hmmmm.  :puke:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: CAMPMEAT on June 04, 2016, 08:14:23 PM
What gets me is, things happen on purpose, by accident or by rich egos, is the way I look at it. Some, (most) rich people, who MIGHT break the certain law, expect to be treated with the,"  Oh, I can get around whatever, because I have money, or I famous and I'll be treated differently ", because of the justice system and the judge doesn't want to make the offender look bad,or themselves, because they donate to his/her campaign. There is always something if you have money. It just irritates me, that a rich person, shoots a bull elk, that someone feeds, of takes pictures of for weeks or years and they are found guilty of every crime in the book, ( by the internet cops on here ), who have absolutely nothing to do with or have REAL knowledge of said crime.. ( some might ).. Move on people...
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: DaveMonti on June 04, 2016, 08:44:05 PM
WHAT?  A GORILLA KILLED THAT BULL???
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jmscon on June 04, 2016, 09:11:49 PM
Just one more detail,
There are no quality bull or any bull tags available for 334 either.
Closed to branch antler bulls!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bigtex on June 04, 2016, 09:12:48 PM
Don't forget guys if your not clear on any regulations you can always call fish and game and ask....oh wait ....
:chuckle:

 Sadly this is true in more ways than one, WDFG was reliable as I remember it, WDFW not so much!
There never was a WDFG. You had the Dept of Fisheries and a Dept of Wildlife. in 1994 they merged to create WDFW. The Dept of Game was pre Dept of Wildlife.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on June 04, 2016, 09:34:25 PM
Don't forget guys if your not clear on any regulations you can always call fish and game and ask....oh wait ....
:chuckle:

 Sadly this is true in more ways than one, WDFG was reliable as I remember it, WDFW not so much!
There never was a WDFG. You had the Dept of Fisheries and a Dept of Wildlife. in 1994 they merged to create WDFW. The Dept of Game was pre Dept of Wildlife.

 Thanks BT, I was hunting when it was Dept. of Game and I think you got the point. ;)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: haus on June 04, 2016, 10:26:53 PM
More like beating a dead elk story to death...........................no wonder I don't frequent this site very often any more..you guys are worse than a bunch of old women.
Oh come on now somethings got to fill the pre-draw void on here  :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on June 04, 2016, 10:33:31 PM
More like beating a dead elk story to death...........................no wonder I don't frequent this site very often any more..you guys are worse than a bunch of old women.
Oh come on now somethings got to fill the pre-draw void on here  :chuckle:

 The best answer yet :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bean Counter on June 04, 2016, 11:01:27 PM
:beatdeadhorse: :beatdeadhorse: :beatdeadhorse: :beatdeadhorse: :beatdeadhorse: :beatdeadhorse: :beatdeadhorse: :beatdeadhorse: :beatdeadhorse: :beatdeadhorse:

More like beating a dead elk story to death...........................no wonder I don't frequent this site very often any more..you guys are worse than a bunch of old women.

Nice Camp I was wondering just how much timber would need to be cut to prop up this dead horse.

,
Thanks. It's 110 % out of my realm of thinking, why anybody with normal thinking, would carry on about something like this. Gorillas are the new fad now anyhow.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on June 04, 2016, 11:09:05 PM
So, was this bull shot above the canal?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on June 04, 2016, 11:59:54 PM
So, was this bull shot above the canal?
Yep, in 334.  :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on June 05, 2016, 07:20:11 AM
Any bets on how many pages this thread will be by the time the next court case is? I don't remember the new date...was it the 21st of June?  And any bets as to whether it will get drug out even longer?  I would think they would like to drag it out until oh....like November?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: DaveMonti on June 05, 2016, 08:24:00 AM
Sure.  I bet it (is) will be:
Far.  Too.  Long.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on June 05, 2016, 10:42:27 AM
I will bet 44 pages of shear internet delight and I will take Feb. 20.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Magnum_Willys on June 05, 2016, 12:39:13 PM
Is subjects hunt this fall going to be a continuation of this thread or will it get its own ?  :yike:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JimmyHoffa on June 05, 2016, 12:41:08 PM
Might as well just shoot a lion and a gorilla too....I mean if WDFW will give permission.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: mfswallace on June 05, 2016, 03:00:19 PM
Bump  :chuckle:        Been a few hours
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on June 05, 2016, 03:27:41 PM
Wait, did he get a sheep? I forgot about that being apart of the raffle until someone posted the pics of the regs yesterday or day before.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: mfswallace on June 05, 2016, 03:37:17 PM
Wait, did he get a sheep? I forgot about that being apart of the raffle until someone posted the pics of the regs yesterday or day before.

He got 3 cause he called wdfw to ask if it was an any weapon tag-- 1 with bow, 1 with muzzy, 1 with rifle




 :tung:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Jpmiller on June 05, 2016, 04:03:40 PM
Wait, did he get a sheep? I forgot about that being apart of the raffle until someone posted the pics of the regs yesterday or day before.

I have kind of been wondering about that too but didn't want to open up another can of worms.... but since we are here, anyone know?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on June 05, 2016, 04:21:41 PM
Yes he got a sheep
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Jpmiller on June 05, 2016, 04:31:24 PM
What a raffle that would be to win. Spend the fall chasing bulls bucks and rams. I'm curious about what all the actual facts of the case are but I'm glad he was able to bag himself a sheep too.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on June 05, 2016, 04:32:48 PM
Anybody got pics of the ram and general area (unit)?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on June 05, 2016, 04:45:24 PM
Anybody got pics of the ram and general area (unit)?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 05, 2016, 05:03:49 PM
lord grizzly & kiticaashunter,

Please enlighten us on the context of these supposed phone call(s)

Early on in this thread it was stated that a call was made to WDFW, then a call was received back from WDFW

Now it is sounding like 2 calls were made to WDFW   :dunno:

Were there more than 2 calls made ????

It has been talked about on here before. A call was made to the regional office asking about the legality of shooting that bull in that unit with that tag. The officer told them he was going to check with Olympia. 14 minutes later on the second call they were told they would need to use a bow or muzzleloader to harvest that bull under the circumstances.

It's not just now sounding like two calls happened,  this is what actually happened. Many on here talk about "a call", these are the people that don't the facts of the situation and have wildly speculated about what was discussed.


1. The ? I was asking was the directions (incoming vs outgoing) of the 2 calls.

2. As far as the phone calls....I don't really care WHAT was discussed, TR knew he could not shoot that bull, to even make that 1st call reeks of a poor attempt to twist the rules in his favor...very un-sportsman like, and definitely not the actions of a person who calls himself a "hunter" (To me, He is just a killer)

3. This right here in bold, from you kiticaashunter, has convinced me 100% that Mr. Reichert and/or his crew are 100% guilty of; 
 
a.  Knowing they could not shoot this animal in 334, thus the call. That is SAD!!! For a guy who has hunted/shot many animals in his lifetime, and calls himself a hunter/sportsman. I agree with JDHasty, HOW COULD YOU CALL YOURSELF A HUNTER and expect this scenario to EVER end well?

b. Being the stereotypical wealthy big game shooter, "Money will buy me everything, and in the end whether right or wrong, ethical or not, fair chase or not, I (___________________) will have the animal that I WANTED hanging on my wall" 

c.  Zero respect from TRUE sportsman who actually hunt



I personally would rather be remembered for being a good guy, not one who twisted things around to get his way, those are the actions of a spoiled child, not a grown man who is supposed to be a sportsman.  :twocents: :twocents:

That is a pretty good list of slanderous assumptions. You made those statements like you know the facts when in fact you don't have a clue.  Pretty low class to be making statements like these about someone when you don't know the truth.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 05, 2016, 05:20:48 PM
In the 2016 regs unit 334 is listed under modern firearm for true spike bull. So should the guy that shoots  a spike bull with a rifle in that unit be ticketed because it is actually a firearms restricted area? Should  he have known this is a restricted area even though the regs have it listed for modern firearm?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bobcat on June 05, 2016, 05:22:36 PM

In the 2016 regs unit 334 is listed under modern firearm for true spike bull. So should the guy that shoots  a spike bull with a rifle in that unit be ticketed because it is actually a firearms restricted area? Should he have known this is a restricted area even though the regs have it listed for modern firearm?

It's always the hunter's responsibility to know ALL the rules and regulations for the unit he is hunting.

Was that really a serious question?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 05, 2016, 05:32:23 PM

In the 2016 regs unit 334 is listed under modern firearm for true spike bull. So should the guy that shoots  a spike bull with a rifle in that unit be ticketed because it is actually a firearms restricted area? Should he have known this is a restricted area even though the regs have it listed for modern firearm?

How can someone be expected to know all the rules when the regs are wrong?
It's always the hunter's responsibility to know ALL the rules and regulations for the unit he is hunting.

Was that really a serious question?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: HntnFsh on June 05, 2016, 05:34:13 PM
I was hoping you would answer my last question about the phone call.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bob33 on June 05, 2016, 05:36:21 PM
In the 2016 regs unit 334 is listed under modern firearm for true spike bull. So should the guy that shoots  a spike bull with a rifle in that unit be ticketed because it is actually a firearms restricted area? Should  he have known this is a restricted area even though the regs have it listed for modern firearm?
Of course he should. There is even a warning on the page.

Perhaps WDFW should so away with the printed regulations altogether, since no one  bothers to read them anymore.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 05, 2016, 05:38:07 PM
lord grizzly & kiticaashunter,

Please enlighten us on the context of these supposed phone call(s)

Early on in this thread it was stated that a call was made to WDFW, then a call was received back from WDFW

Now it is sounding like 2 calls were made to WDFW   :dunno:

Were there more than 2 calls made ????

It has been talked about on here before. A call was made to the regional office asking about the legality of shooting that bull in that unit with that tag. The officer told them he was going to check with Olympia. 14 minutes later on the second call they were told they would need to use a bow or muzzleloader to harvest that bull under the circumstances.

It's not just now sounding like two calls happened,  this is what actually happened. Many on here talk about "a call", these are the people that don't the facts of the situation and have wildly speculated about what was discussed.
interesting. So was that bull described as a branch antler bull in the questions asked of WDFW during the phone calls?

Yes
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JimmyHoffa on June 05, 2016, 05:45:26 PM
In the 2016 regs unit 334 is listed under modern firearm for true spike bull. So should the guy that shoots  a spike bull with a rifle in that unit be ticketed because it is actually a firearms restricted area? Should  he have known this is a restricted area even though the regs have it listed for modern firearm?
There are modern firearms that are not excluded in firearms restricted areas.  A few of them allow shotguns and revolvers which are legal to hunt game with.  A 12 gauge slug is pretty effective, modern and legal.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on June 05, 2016, 05:50:12 PM
In the 2016 regs unit 334 is listed under modern firearm for true spike bull. So should the guy that shoots  a spike bull with a rifle in that unit be ticketed because it is actually a firearms restricted area? Should  he have known this is a restricted area even though the regs have it listed for modern firearm?
Of course he should. There is even a warning on the page.

Perhaps WDFW should so away with the printed regulations altogether, since no one  bothers to read them anymore.
Or they can just change the rules to fit their management schemes as they go.  Without following process I might add.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on June 05, 2016, 06:02:07 PM
Anybody got pics of the ram and general area (unit)?

Quilomene ram?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on June 05, 2016, 06:06:45 PM
Anybody got pics of the ram and general area (unit)?

Quilomene ram?

Nevermind
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on June 05, 2016, 07:04:01 PM
334 ram.    Below the canal.    Hand fed.


At least that's what I read on the internet.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Alchase on June 05, 2016, 07:09:23 PM
334 ram.    Below the canal.    Han fed.


At least that's what I read on the internet.

Called first to get permission ??
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on June 05, 2016, 07:13:09 PM
But was there one call or two?

And did they ask specifically about the legality of shooting a ram with a chip on the left curl????

I expect a FULL internet inquisition.

I want harsh conclusions drawn before it works through the legal system.

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: mfswallace on June 05, 2016, 07:16:29 PM
334 ram.    Below the canal.    Han fed.


At least that's what I read on the internet.

Called first to get permission ??

Yeah, he and his " guides" weren't sure if legal to aerial gun with a photon laser beam... got the go ahead cause he's a big spender
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: NOCK NOCK on June 05, 2016, 08:15:43 PM


That is a pretty good list of slanderous assumptions. You made those statements like you know the facts when in fact you don't have a clue.  Pretty low class to be making statements like these about someone when you don't know the truth.


Here is a FACT for you Kiti.......You do not know me.  Therefore, you have no idea of WHAT I know. Guess it's OK for you to be slanderous though :dunno:  I may be low class(I prefer the term redneck :chuckle:),   but I do hunt legally. FYI

PS, I will no longer play your game.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: HntnFsh on June 05, 2016, 08:26:09 PM


That is a pretty good list of slanderous assumptions. You made those statements like you know the facts when in fact you don't have a clue.  Pretty low class to be making statements like these about someone when you don't know the truth.


Here is a FACT for you Kiti.......You do not know me.  Therefore, you have no idea of WHAT I know. Guess it's OK for you to be slanderous though :dunno:  I may be low class(I prefer the term redneck :chuckle:),   but I do hunt legally. FYI

PS, I will no longer play your game.

 :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: CAMPMEAT on June 05, 2016, 08:43:35 PM
.................any and all questions should be asked through Conservation Northwest for all of the WDFW rules and laws.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: NOCK NOCK on June 05, 2016, 09:17:32 PM
That wont work camp, their too busy running the Forest Circus.  :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on June 05, 2016, 09:42:53 PM
So, from pooling resources I have discovered this;













I am now hunting the 334 for trophy bulls, rams and bucks. :IBCOOL: those that knew the 334 was a hidden gem of elk, deer and sheep were up until this point hoarding a diamond mine. Well, thank you hw for showing me the promise land as I will now pillage it for all 3 species this fall, thank you that will be all. :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on June 05, 2016, 10:27:13 PM
Anybody got pics of the ram and general area (unit)?

That's a baby ram, and I think it still has milk on its lips!  :lol4:

Some big great white hunter must have killed that baby ram.  :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on June 05, 2016, 11:06:39 PM
Anybody got pics of the ram and general area (unit)?

That's a baby ram, and I think it still has milk on its lips!  :lol4:

Some big great white hunter must have killed that baby ram.  :chuckle:

 A trophy is in the eye of the beholder yes?

 Perhaps the hunt was more about the experience and time spent with family/friends. :dunno:

 I agree it's not a "big" or "high scoring" ram, but I've seen similar class elk, whitetail, blacktail and mule deer displayed as proudly by several members of this site, hailed as trophies with almost 100% agreement, simply because of the circumstances.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: MountainWalk on June 05, 2016, 11:10:14 PM
But sheep are soon easy.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on June 05, 2016, 11:14:08 PM
But sheep are so easy.

 Not in the units he could hunt, at least not "big" rams.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on June 06, 2016, 05:51:14 AM
The ram was a legal ram taken in a legal unit and he had a tag for it. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on June 06, 2016, 06:03:52 AM
Wow.     The guy hasn't been convicted of anything related to the subject elk, but people feel the need to take snide shots at his ram.

Not HW's finest hour.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: teanawayslayer on June 06, 2016, 06:41:52 AM
Wow.     The guy hasn't been convicted of anything related to the subject elk, but people feel the need to take snide shots at his ram.

Not HW's finest hour.
:yeah: come on guys there is nothing wrong with that ram. It was taken within the peramiters of the tag he had! Really low blow. :twocents:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: time2hunt on June 06, 2016, 06:44:23 AM
(http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160606/f4d25066e9c1765ef75bc96778084dac.jpg)
The ram was shot on Eaton and went 163 1/4 which puts it in the Washington book. So back to school on scoring and judging sheep :)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Ghost Hunter on June 06, 2016, 06:46:29 AM
The ram was a legal ram taken in a legal unit and he had a tag for it. 

Works for me.  Bet it eats good.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: idahohuntr on June 06, 2016, 07:31:59 AM
If you are convicted of poaching, aren't you removed from big game record books? I thought that's how B&C operates anyways?

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: popeshawnpaul on June 06, 2016, 07:33:39 AM
Looks like an 8 year old ram.  Nothing wrong with that.  Wouldn't have got much bigger as the annuli are close together at the base...   :twocents:

How did we get onto sheep?

Next hearing is June 21.  It's a pre-trial scheduling conference.  If I had money I'd bet it will be continued...

That picture of the "spike" is gold.  If I were an attorney I would hold a picture of that up and then Bullwinkle and ask the difference.  There has to be 1 person out of 6 that will bite...
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on June 06, 2016, 07:48:02 AM
That was me. I just asked if he filled the sheep and buck tags and if anybody had pics to share? The serial downward was not me.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Magnum_Willys on June 06, 2016, 08:06:12 AM
That's a baby ram, and I think it still has milk on its lips!  :lol4:
  :chuckle:
yea but this is some funny stuff  :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on June 06, 2016, 08:23:27 AM
Anybody got pics of the ram and general area (unit)?

That's a baby ram, and I think it still has milk on its lips!  :lol4:

Some big great white hunter must have killed that baby ram.  :chuckle:

 A trophy is in the eye of the beholder yes?

 Perhaps the hunt was more about the experience and time spent with family/friends. :dunno:

 I agree it's not a "big" or "high scoring" ram, but I've seen similar class elk, whitetail, blacktail and mule deer displayed as proudly by several members of this site, hailed as trophies with almost 100% agreement, simply because of the circumstances.
:yeah:
The quoted negativity is why some many others don't share field photos here anymore.  What the heck?

That is a legal ram and nicer than any ram I have on the wall or probably ever will have.  Heck if I ever get drawn, even if it is one of the ewe tags I am going to be proud of it.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bearpaw on June 06, 2016, 08:54:48 AM
A good percentage of the posts seem motivated out of jealousy that Reichert can afford to buy these tags. The sheep had nothing to do with this topic yet it got drug in and snide remarks were made and mostly just because the guy was smart enough to find a way to make a good living. Pretty disgusting!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on June 06, 2016, 08:58:10 AM
I agree dale, if it was a everyday average joe that killed that bull, it wouldn't of even rated a speed bump on hunt wa.....
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: idahohuntr on June 06, 2016, 09:06:11 AM
One person made a snide remark about the sheep - then a bunch of folks pointed out that was uncalled for citing the hunt was legal, trophys are in the hunters mind etc.

A lot of the folks who have provided the most insight into this case were the first to call out the snide remark regarding the sheep  :dunno:

Sorry - I just don't see it as people jealously picking on Reichert.  All of the negative press and attention Reichert has received are almost entirely the result of his own actions.  :twocents: 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on June 06, 2016, 09:06:15 AM
Maybe some of you guys that claimed that there is jealousy going on are right afterall.  I didn't think so, but it seems that I could have been wrong.  It does seem like there could be some jealousy here if some people are slamming the guy's fine ram.  If they are jealous of a ram, then maybe some or jealous of taking a tame bull elk. :dunno:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JimmyHoffa on June 06, 2016, 09:16:15 AM
I agree dale, if it was a everyday average joe that killed that bull, it wouldn't of even rated a speed bump on hunt wa.....
Especially not the mega thread this has turned into though.  I didn't even click on the earlier thread that evolved into this one until Cboom kept bringing it up a few times a day...now just here for the entertainment value.
If it was average joe, I try to think what would've been different.  Did this guy lose his rifle, truck and etc?  Was the animal confiscated?  Did WDFW go to his house with warrants and take his freezer?  I didn't want to wade through the 900 posts.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on June 06, 2016, 09:29:21 AM
I could see this going a ton of different directions if it was an average joe.  My guess is many of the same arguments would be made and many of the same questions would be asked.  People would be just as passionate about it on both sides.  The final outcome might be different if it was an average joe but I don't think the conversation would change much.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: klickman on June 06, 2016, 09:33:27 AM
High profile hunters are always going to draw the most attention. Just like when a celebrity gets in trouble with the law, it's headline news. The average joe isn't under the microscope some of these people are. That's why they have to do everything legal. Otherwise they will get caught. Too many eyes on their every move.

That's a dandy ram. Especially for that area.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: blackveltbowhunter on June 06, 2016, 09:42:37 AM
 Sorry, the TR fanboys are grasping at straws here. It seems they want to insulate him because he is rich and can afford these tags. The snide remarks about the ram are uncalled for and unsportsmanlike.  But the jealousy train is so wore out its pathetic. Whether Reichert is found guilty of illegal harvest or not, the decision he made to take this bull comes with consequences. From everything said here and from both sides, he made the decision to tag this bull regardless of the consequences because "he doesn't really care what people think". Cool. Good for him. One of the consequences is a unknown amount of speculation and bashing on public forums.

If I had rolled up popped the bull and loaded him up in my truck. I would fully expect the same treatment in the huntwa court. Probably much worse because I would have been tagless, and trespassing along with hunting in a closed unit. The argument that all the publicity is because he is high profile is just dumb. The bull was high profile. Don't take that away from him.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bearpaw on June 06, 2016, 10:01:06 AM
Speaking for myself...

I see a lot of hatred of the fact that the guy has been successful in life. This is America, we all have a choice in what direction we take with our lives and we all have the option of doing what it takes to make a better living so we can afford to buy these tags. The irony that nobody considers is that the money from these special tags helps fund wildlife management and ultimately keeps the price lower for everyone else to hunt cheaper.  :dunno:

FACT, many comments involve: his wealth; that he got a big bull most thought was off-limits; or that it was easy to shoot the bull, he didn't have to hike 20 miles and summit a dozen mountains to kill it. We all have different reasons why we hunt and we all have different methods how we hunt, but none of that should be a part of this conversation, ethics is a different conversation.

It sounds like he had landowner permission and WDFW permission to shoot the bull, unless that is proven false in court it may be pretty hard to convict him of breaking the law. The question is did he violate the law or not, in my opinion we should let the court figure out the truth!

(These comments are my personal opinion, Hunting-Washington is an internet service provider and has taken no official position on this issue.)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on June 06, 2016, 10:04:55 AM
So if I'm defending I would ask simple yes/no questions.  (Photo from this thread http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php?topic=101806.0)
Is this a branched antler bull?
Is this legal in 334?
Is 334 open to branch bulls?

The questions should be:

Is this bull a legal elk in a three point or branched antler elk minimum GMU?  The answer is yes.

Is this bull a legal spike in a spike only GMU such as GMU 334?  The answer is yes.

Is GMU 334 ever open for any bull that cannot be legally defined as a spike?  The answer is no.

Was Tod Reichert hunting in GMU 334?  Yes

Could Todd Reichert legally hunt with that tag in an area that is only open for elk that can be legally defined as antlerless elk or spike elk? The answer is no - because the area was not open in 2015 to hunting any elk that can not be legally defined as a spike in that particular unit.   

The bottom line is that that particular tag is not valid in a GMU that is not open to branched antler elk hunting period.  That tag is/was no more valid in GMU 334 than it would have been valid in Lewis County.  It has nothing to do with which elk he shot, it has everything to do with him killing an elk, any elk, in an area that was not open under the tag he held.   

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on June 06, 2016, 10:08:15 AM
So if I'm defending I would ask simple yes/no questions.  (Photo from this thread http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php?topic=101806.0)
Is this a branched antler bull?
Is this legal in 334?
Is 334 open to branch bulls?

The questions should be:

Is this bull a legal elk in a three point or branched antler elk minimum GMU?  The answer is yes.

Is this bull a legal spike in a spike only GMU such as GMU 334?  The answer is yes.

Is GMU 334 ever open for any bull that cannot be legally defined as a spike?  The answer is no.

Was Tod Reichert hunting in GMU 334?  Yes

Could Todd Reichert legally hunt with that tag in an area that is only open for elk that can be legally defined as antlerless elk or spike elk? The answer is no - because the area was not open in 2015 to hunting any elk that can not be legally defined as a spike in that particular unit.   

The bottom line is that that particular tag is not valid in a GMU that is not open to branched antler elk hunting period.  That tag is/was no more valid in GMU 334 than it would have been valid in Lewis County.  It has nothing to do with which elk he shot, it has everything to do with him killing an elk, any elk, in an area that was not open under the tag he held.   
Show me a rcw that differentiates and clearly defines spike (not true spike) units as off limits to raffle/auction tags. 
Good luck.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on June 06, 2016, 10:09:40 AM
One person made a snide remark about the sheep - then a bunch of folks pointed out that was uncalled for citing the hunt was legal, trophys are in the hunters mind etc.

A lot of the folks who have provided the most insight into this case were the first to call out the snide remark regarding the sheep  :dunno:

Sorry - I just don't see it as people jealously picking on Reichert.  All of the negative press and attention Reichert has received are almost entirely the result of his own actions.  :twocents: 

Well said.
This was a raffle permit hunt. Pretty much anyone can afford a raffle ticket, right?

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on June 06, 2016, 10:19:42 AM
Sorry, the TR fanboys are grasping at straws here. It seems they want to insulate him because he is rich and can afford these tags. The snide remarks about the ram are uncalled for and unsportsmanlike.  But the jealousy train is so wore out its pathetic. Whether Reichert is found guilty of illegal harvest or not, the decision he made to take this bull comes with consequences. From everything said here and from both sides, he made the decision to tag this bull regardless of the consequences because "he doesn't really care what people think". Cool. Good for him. One of the consequences is a unknown amount of speculation and bashing on public forums.

If I had rolled up popped the bull and loaded him up in my truck. I would fully expect the same treatment in the huntwa court. Probably much worse because I would have been tagless, and trespassing along with hunting in a closed unit. The argument that all the publicity is because he is high profile is just dumb. The bull was high profile. Don't take that away from him.
For the record I'm not a TR fanboy. These tags have created controversy for 20 years.  I don't even agree with some of the ideology that goes along with them.  If anyone is grasping at straws it is the department and it is reaping what it sows. 
I am also not a member of these (there are several different ones) auction tag holder fan clubs.  Many comments from the start of this whole debacle have been rooted by interpersonal relationships.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Alchase on June 06, 2016, 10:21:17 AM
What is there to be jealous about?
The elk is in my book, world class. The Ram would be an incredible Ram, though I have never hunted sheep.

Who would be jealous, when we all see how this hunt went down, and honestly I would take a "legal" three point, from a three point or better GMU and consider the Jerky a finer trophy then shooting a tame bull in a closed GMU, then have all my friends to go online and muddy up the situation, or threaten people with lawsuits for calling me out?


If I can't be proud of the hunt, I could not call it a trophy

Jealousy, no
Pity, disgust, yes
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: KNOPHISH on June 06, 2016, 10:23:10 AM
Speaking for myself...

I see a lot of hatred of the fact that the guy has been successful in life.


(These comments are my personal opinion, Hunting-Washington is an internet service provider and has taken no official position on this issue.)

I haven't really seen too much about hating the guy & his successful working career, I see it more in the form of hating he shot in in the closed unit or hating that he might get away with it.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: WAPatriot on June 06, 2016, 10:34:07 AM
i would love to see the Wdfw get counter sued and absolutely screwed. I am talking class action screwed. I don't know all the facts but if someone with obsential authority green lighted a hunt and now someone is having their personal reputation ruined as a result. Now the same department decided to press charges. Things could and should get real expensive for the Wdfw. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: WAPatriot on June 06, 2016, 10:38:17 AM
Also hunters need to unite and not fight. a hunter who spends as much money on hunting, a sport that members on this site are suppose to love should always get the benefit of the doubt. Go cry on a peta website. On a hunting website hunters should be supported and innocent until proved guilty. We're a small enough minority as it is.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: WAPatriot on June 06, 2016, 10:41:08 AM
And not a true spike only unit = branched
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: CAMPMEAT on June 06, 2016, 10:42:35 AM
That wont work camp, their too busy running the Forest Circus.  :chuckle:



.....and all of our rights too.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: popeshawnpaul on June 06, 2016, 10:45:18 AM
Speaking for myself...

I see a lot of hatred of the fact that the guy has been successful in life. This is America, we all have a choice in what direction we take with our lives and we all have the option of doing what it takes to make a better living so we can afford to buy these tags. The irony that nobody considers is that the money from these special tags helps fund wildlife management and ultimately keeps the price lower for everyone else to hunt cheaper.  :dunno:

FACT, many comments involve: his wealth; that he got a big bull most thought was off-limits; or that it was easy to shoot the bull, he didn't have to hike 20 miles and summit a dozen mountains to kill it. We all have different reasons why we hunt and we all have different methods how we hunt, but none of that should be a part of this conversation, ethics is a different conversation.

It sounds like he had landowner permission and WDFW permission to shoot the bull, unless that is proven false in court it may be pretty hard to convict him of breaking the law. The question is did he violate the law or not, in my opinion we should let the court figure out the truth!

(These comments are my personal opinion, Hunting-Washington is an internet service provider and has taken no official position on this issue.)

Hunters just like to bring down other hunters for some reason.  They claim it's not jealousy but I see that in many responses on this thread.  The moral hunt police are the most hypocritical people I meet.  Those that claim and preach they follow the law and bash someone that makes a mistake only makes me more suspicious of them.  It's no different than the preacher or politician railing against gay people.  Yep, they are gay.  I see it time after time in my profession with hunting charges.  They get up and say to the judge they teach hunter ed, work for WDFW,, never break the law, etc. in front of the judge.

Unlawful Big Game hunting encompasses a lot of different types of conduct.  Whether you have a tag but are just out of the unit, tag an animal later, tag it for someone else, etc.  I'm still maintaining probably half the people calling out TR have done this or a Title 77 charge at some point in their life.  Those that preach the loudest are probably the biggest offenders.  I've hunted with zillions of people over the years and tons on Huntwa.  So has Bearpaw and I bet he sees small issues daily.  Maybe they don't have their hunter orange on, have their clip loaded in the car, etc.  Most guys cut a corner here and there but maybe not that serious of a crime.  Do the best you can and they are so confusing your bound to error into an issue you didn't realize.  Lots of archers don't have the proper arrow for their bow under the law.

So, preach to me about how you have never broke a law before hunting...   :rolleyes:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Alchase on June 06, 2016, 10:45:33 AM
Bearpaw, you have provided us this forum that I have enjoyed from the beginning. I have met some incredible people, heard their stories and shared their adventures, and some heartbreaks.
For that I am and will be forever great full.

The fact that you feel the need to post this:

(These comments are my personal opinion, Hunting-Washington is an internet service provider and has taken no official position on this issue.)

to keep Hunting Washington from being sued, is very telling.

I understand why you have to do this, and it sickens me.

Thank you for all you have done.




Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 06, 2016, 10:58:25 AM
Speaking for myself...

I see a lot of hatred of the fact that the guy has been successful in life. This is America, we all have a choice in what direction we take with our lives and we all have the option of doing what it takes to make a better living so we can afford to buy these tags. The irony that nobody considers is that the money from these special tags helps fund wildlife management and ultimately keeps the price lower for everyone else to hunt cheaper.  :dunno:

FACT, many comments involve: his wealth; that he got a big bull most thought was off-limits; or that it was easy to shoot the bull, he didn't have to hike 20 miles and summit a dozen mountains to kill it. We all have different reasons why we hunt and we all have different methods how we hunt, but none of that should be a part of this conversation, ethics is a different conversation.

It sounds like he had landowner permission and WDFW permission to shoot the bull, unless that is proven false in court it may be pretty hard to convict him of breaking the law. The question is did he violate the law or not, in my opinion we should let the court figure out the truth!

(These comments are my personal opinion, Hunting-Washington is an internet service provider and has taken no official position on this issue.)


its a pretty commen tune when ever any of these tag holders hunts are discussed on the internet. show me a thread about a goveners tag and ill show you a whole bunch of green eyed monsters replying to it. nothing new (or different) here
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on June 06, 2016, 11:10:37 AM
Tod riechert fan club!! Lmao
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jkthomps on June 06, 2016, 11:10:53 AM
  Do the best you can and they are so confusing your bound to error into an issue you didn't realize.  Lots of archers don't have the proper arrow for their bow under the law.

So, preach to me about how you have never broke a law before hunting...   :rolleyes:

I bet some people are reviewing the regs again to see what the arrow requirements are.  :tup: :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 06, 2016, 11:12:15 AM
Tod riechert fan club!! Lmfao

the hater club is even funnier
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on June 06, 2016, 11:13:41 AM
Sorry, the TR fanboys are grasping at straws here. It seems they want to insulate him because he is rich and can afford these tags. The snide remarks about the ram are uncalled for and unsportsmanlike.  But the jealousy train is so wore out its pathetic. Whether Reichert is found guilty of illegal harvest or not, the decision he made to take this bull comes with consequences. From everything said here and from both sides, he made the decision to tag this bull regardless of the consequences because "he doesn't really care what people think". Cool. Good for him. One of the consequences is a unknown amount of speculation and bashing on public forums.

If I had rolled up popped the bull and loaded him up in my truck. I would fully expect the same treatment in the huntwa court. Probably much worse because I would have been tagless, and trespassing along with hunting in a closed unit. The argument that all the publicity is because he is high profile is just dumb. The bull was high profile. Don't take that away from him.

Maybe the gossiping dramaqueens can zip there yap and let the facts come out when he has his day in court?? Just a thunk...
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on June 06, 2016, 11:14:46 AM
Tod riechert fan club!! Lmfao

the hater club is even funnier

For sure!!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on June 06, 2016, 11:19:57 AM
i would love to see the Wdfw get counter sued and absolutely screwed. I am talking class action screwed. I don't know all the facts but if someone with obsential authority green lighted a hunt and now someone is having their personal reputation ruined as a result. Now the same department decided to press charges. Things could and should get real expensive for the Wdfw. 

I'm not positive, but I don't think WDFW is the one pressing the charges. I thought I read in this thread that it's the county that filed the charges.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JLS on June 06, 2016, 12:08:04 PM
Doggone it, looks like the herpes is flaring up again  :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on June 06, 2016, 12:13:15 PM
Also hunters need to unite and not fight. a hunter who spends as much money on hunting, a sport that members on this site are suppose to love should always get the benefit of the doubt. Go cry on a peta website. On a hunting website hunters should be supported and innocent until proved guilty. We're a small enough minority as it is.

Where have we seen that line of reasoning before?  If you don't remember, let me help ya' out.  The BT sniffer tried a variation on that theme to try to redirect the discussion from from what he was up to by leading the topic off into a "bow hunters are being singled out" direction.  The BT sniffer wasn't the first to try that unscrupulous rhetorical device and WAPatriot won't be the last. 

It has been my experience that this particular canard is always one of the first refuges of four-flushers as well as their defenders & acolytes once they figure they areas stuck as a bug on fly paper .


*****

i would love to see the Wdfw get counter sued and absolutely screwed. I am talking class action screwed. I don't know all the facts but if someone with obsential authority green lighted a hunt and now someone is having their personal reputation ruined as a result. Now the same department decided to press charges. Things could and should get real expensive for the Wdfw.

?/? obsential ?/?  Is that a word? 

Hmmm, Oswald Bates is that you posting as WAPatriot?


Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: blackveltbowhunter on June 06, 2016, 12:25:09 PM
Sorry, the TR fanboys are grasping at straws here. It seems they want to insulate him because he is rich and can afford these tags. The snide remarks about the ram are uncalled for and unsportsmanlike.  But the jealousy train is so wore out its pathetic. Whether Reichert is found guilty of illegal harvest or not, the decision he made to take this bull comes with consequences. From everything said here and from both sides, he made the decision to tag this bull regardless of the consequences because "he doesn't really care what people think". Cool. Good for him. One of the consequences is a unknown amount of speculation and bashing on public forums.

If I had rolled up popped the bull and loaded him up in my truck. I would fully expect the same treatment in the huntwa court. Probably much worse because I would have been tagless, and trespassing along with hunting in a closed unit. The argument that all the publicity is because he is high profile is just dumb. The bull was high profile. Don't take that away from him.
For the record I'm not a TR fanboy. These tags have created controversy for 20 years.  I don't even agree with some of the ideology that goes along with them.  If anyone is grasping at straws it is the department and it is reaping what it sows. 
I am also not a member of these (there are several different ones) auction tag holder fan clubs.  Many comments from the start of this whole debacle have been rooted by interpersonal relationships.

I understand  :tup: And I completely agree with your assessment of the department and the tags themselves. Although I think the raffle tags have been less controversial overall than the governor tags. I think the tags do generate revenue, but am far from convinced they are necessary when discussing elk and deer.

There have been plenty comments made that the only reason this is receiving so much press is due to the fact that TR himself is so widely known and wealthy. And the comments here are spurred by jealousy envy and hate. I am sure some are. That is unfortunate. But I'm not a hater. TR has lived the american dream and is entitled to the tags as much as anyone else.

My point is if TR had never had a run in several years ago I never would have known who he was. I don't follow these tags other than the occasional thread on here. But I knew about this bull.  Until this all started I had no clue who the  raffle or governor tag holders were/are. And there is a decent chance TR's governor bull would not have even made it on here had it not been for this one. Whether the hunt is determined to be legal or not is not the point. Just because something is legal, does not mean it won't attract negative attention.

 
   
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on June 06, 2016, 12:30:12 PM
i would love to see the Wdfw get counter sued and absolutely screwed. I am talking class action screwed. I don't know all the facts but if someone with obsential authority green lighted a hunt and now someone is having their personal reputation ruined as a result. Now the same department decided to press charges. Things could and should get real expensive for the Wdfw. 

I'm not positive, but I don't think WDFW is the one pressing the charges. I thought I read in this thread that it's the county that filed the charges.
Did the county process the case and present it to the prosecutors office? 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bob33 on June 06, 2016, 12:40:14 PM
Criminal charges are filed by a prosecutor, not a state agency like WDFW.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on June 06, 2016, 12:59:32 PM
Criminal charges are filed by a prosecutor, not a state agency like WDFW.
Bob33,
Was an outside agency brought in to investigate and process this case? Is there potential involvement by officers?  At first I was a little confused but understood what the poster meant by saying the WDFW pressed charges . Is there more to the charges internally with the department?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JimmyHoffa on June 06, 2016, 01:05:34 PM
Criminal charges are filed by a prosecutor, not a state agency like WDFW.
Bob33,
Was an outside agency brought in to investigate and process this case? Is there potential involvement by officers?  At first I was a little confused but understood what the poster meant by saying the WDFW pressed charges . Is there more to the charges internally with the department?
I just kind of think about the issues UCwarden had when you bring up internal WDFW investigations.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: TheHunt on June 06, 2016, 01:15:56 PM
I have no dog in this fight. 

1.  As of today charges were filed against Tod. 
2.  He has a great lawyer out of Spokane
3.  There was some legal stuff with this going to court.

Other than that nothing else has happened.  Correct?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JLS on June 06, 2016, 01:17:29 PM
Lest I be accused of not bringing anything productive to this diseased mess, let's dispel some misinformation here:

Class action suits are for a large number of folks who have been aggrieved in the same manner, so unless 100 other folks shoot a Bullwinkle in GMU 334 under the same auspices that the defendant did, there will be no class action suit.

A county prosecutor makes the INDEPENDENT decision to file charges or not.  An agency can refer/forward them to the prosecutor, but the cannot compel or force a prosecutor to file charges.  The agency CAN request the AGs office to intervene, but this is not common practice.

Unless an agency's officer was materially involved in the case, there would be no outside agency doing the investigation.  Thus far there have been no allegations of criminal conduct by any of the WDFW officers, correct? 

A law enforcement officer authorizing an unlawful act would be considered misconduct.  Have any complaints of official misconduct been filed?

Quote
. I don't know all the facts

Prefacing comments with quotes like this, and then asking for class action lawsuits doesn't lend a lot of credibility to some folks.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Odell on June 06, 2016, 01:50:27 PM
No such thing as exonerating circumstances phool?

  You asked for evidence of guilt, of this there is no question, he killed a branched antler bull in unit 334........period, can't spin that!

 As I said, everything else is up to the courts.

Guilt is decided at the end of the trial, not the beginning. Even with a confession

Presumption of innocence is not the same thing as being innocent.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: WAPatriot on June 06, 2016, 02:10:02 PM
Class action lawsuits are not lawsuits that necessarily harm lots of people. They are awarded to punish wrongdoers in such a harsh way as that it will deter others from making the same mistake.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: WAPatriot on June 06, 2016, 02:15:28 PM
Ostensible authority look it up it has everything to do with this case. Its been a long time since I took law classes.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JLS on June 06, 2016, 02:23:32 PM
Class action lawsuits are not lawsuits that necessarily harm lots of people. They are awarded to punish wrongdoers in such a harsh way as that it will deter others from making the same mistake.

The term "class" in class action means that a collectively large group of defendants are being represented in the pursuit of a claim.

Are you thinking of punitive damages?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Colville on June 06, 2016, 02:44:18 PM
(http://).....So, preach to me about how you have never broke a law before hunting...   :rolleyes:


Pope, there may be some people butt hurt about his money.  And you are right, most will have broken game laws somewhere along the line.

This is a Clintonian what’s the definition of “is” type of argument that is being made. It’s a legalistic bit of maneuvering, a charade. People aren’t dumb. They can read the regs.  It’s plain as day that  this discussion of true vs regular spike was an attempt to thread a legal needle.   They were hoping, angling and prying to get someone at WDFW to contort the regs into a pretzel in order to claim the unit was open to branch bull hunting. Not caring that even if they would say it’s “ok” that it should never be done.  That particular bull, where it lived, should not have been shot as a matter of good public relations and decency.

To the others that think his reputation is at stake in the court case.  No, it isn’t.  A very popular animal, open to public view and regularly photographed, safe from any legal hunting pressure, living in wide open alfalfa fields, no longer behaving like a wild elk in or out of elk season was shot with the ease of a killing a heifer by a someone who paid $50k+ for the privilege, observed now by hunters who see the rules as clear as water.  The harm to reputation has nothing to do with the case outcome. Many legal, yet repugnant, things can be done.  If you know that bull has notoriety and is loved in the community and you wiggle around a way to shoot it anyway right on that open field, you are putting a stick right in those people’s eye.  There’s no way around that fact. A call may insulate you from legal penalty, but it can do nothing to protect someone from the public’s judgment.

A satirical description of the hunt:

I drove up on the black top and parked.  A school bus and a mom in her minivan passed by.  Still in the cab, the wily creature was hard to make out as it stood in the thickest cover, the deepest 10 inches of alfalfa this field was choked with.  I put down my road mug of starbucks and the second half of my bear claw on the dash. I pulled up my Swaro 10x50’s, yep, that’s the bull. He was a bit faint, but at 100 yards I was able to pick him out through the thick stuff.  My door closing behind me with a thud I made for the back of the truck.  My buddy Zeb helped and loaded the gun.  My friends and I all wore jeans and flannel shirts so that we would fit in the bull’s natural environment. Just another farmer  over here, no worries mr elk (at least that’s the theory). I could hear traffic and children’s voices in the distance of this wild place.  Next we came up with a plan to get on this beast.  After much debate…. I began to walk straight at him.  One, two, three steps, stopped.  Forgot my hat on the hood of the truck. Darn it!!! I hope this doesn’t spoil the stalk.  I went back for my hat when it occurred to me that I hadn’t finished my danish so I opened the rig and stuffed the 2nd half in my mouth and pulled my hat down tight for the stalk.  My pulse rate was easily 70 now with the anticipation. I pulled up my Swaros again, there he was, now laying down and chewing cud in the gnarly thicket, looking straight at me.  Though he was unable to see me in the extreme farmer break up pattern we’re wearing.  Two, three, four steps.  I’m getting sweaty now and a little nervous so I take a couple minutes to calm down.  Five…. That oughta do it. BANG. Flop.

YEAAAAAAAAAH!!!!!!  WHAHOOO!!!!!  What a hunt, what a great animal…!!   Hi Mrs Johnson, we’ll get it out of the field in just a minute, nice dress you have on, is that paisley?


Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 06, 2016, 06:04:52 PM

In the 2016 regs unit 334 is listed under modern firearm for true spike bull. So should the guy that shoots  a spike bull with a rifle in that unit be ticketed because it is actually a firearms restricted area? Should he have known this is a restricted area even though the regs have it listed for modern firearm?

It's always the hunter's responsibility to know ALL the rules and regulations for the unit he is hunting.

Was that really a serious question?

And for the record I agree it is the hunters responsibility to know the laws. For me personally if I have a question on legality I would think I did my due diligence if I called the WDFW and got an answer to my question.

Let's say someone this season Looks at the regs and sees unit 334 says it's open for modern to shoot a spike. Then calls WDFW to verify they can shoot a spike with a centerfire rifle in that unit, and are told it's fine. Do you believe A, they should be sited for that, and B be labeled all over these forums a poacher?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 92xj on June 06, 2016, 06:09:32 PM

In the 2016 regs unit 334 is listed under modern firearm for true spike bull. So should the guy that shoots  a spike bull with a rifle in that unit be ticketed because it is actually a firearms restricted area? Should he have known this is a restricted area even though the regs have it listed for modern firearm?

It's always the hunter's responsibility to know ALL the rules and regulations for the unit he is hunting.

Was that really a serious question?

And for the record I agree it is the hunters responsibility to know the laws. For me personally if I have a question on legality I would think I did my due diligence if I called the WDFW and got an answer to my question.

Let's say someone this season Looks at the regs and sees unit 334 says it's open for modern to shoot a spike. Then calls WDFW to verify they can shoot a spike with a centerfire rifle in that unit, and are told it's fine. Do you believe A, they should be sited for that, and B be labeled all over these forums a poacher?

Yes,
It's also in the regs that its restricted. You can't choose which regs your want to read and follow. If they can read certain parts of the regs they can read the whole thing. I don't understand the selective reasoning by you.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on June 06, 2016, 07:02:23 PM

In the 2016 regs unit 334 is listed under modern firearm for true spike bull. So should the guy that shoots  a spike bull with a rifle in that unit be ticketed because it is actually a firearms restricted area? Should he have known this is a restricted area even though the regs have it listed for modern firearm?

It's always the hunter's responsibility to know ALL the rules and regulations for the unit he is hunting.

Was that really a serious question?

And for the record I agree it is the hunters responsibility to know the laws. For me personally if I have a question on legality I would think I did my due diligence if I called the WDFW and got an answer to my question.

Let's say someone this season Looks at the regs and sees unit 334 says it's open for modern to shoot a spike. Then calls WDFW to verify they can shoot a spike with a centerfire rifle in that unit, and are told it's fine. Do you believe A, they should be sited for that, and B be labeled all over these forums a poacher?

Yes,
It's also in the regs that its restricted. You can't choose which regs your want to read and follow. If they can read certain parts of the regs they can read the whole thing. I don't understand the selective reasoning by you.

 :yeah: they should be cited and "it depends" whether or not they should be labeled a poacher.   If it was negligence, as in an oversight or just poor judgement in failing to read and understand the restrictions on the tag they are holding and/or the Unit they are hunting in, then it could be that they just screwed up.  It could be an isolated case of using poor judgement. 

However if they participated in a deliberate and systematic orchestration of a scheme by which they could take an animal they know (like have been told numerous times), or should know (like in have been told numerous times but are too thick headed), is not legal in the GMU they are hunting in...  then they are a poacher and an unrepentant poacher at that. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 06, 2016, 07:16:52 PM
Speaking for myself...

I see a lot of hatred of the fact that the guy has been successful in life. This is America, we all have a choice in what direction we take with our lives and we all have the option of doing what it takes to make a better living so we can afford to buy these tags. The irony that nobody considers is that the money from these special tags helps fund wildlife management and ultimately keeps the price lower for everyone else to hunt cheaper.  :dunno:

FACT, many comments involve: his wealth; that he got a big bull most thought was off-limits; or that it was easy to shoot the bull, he didn't have to hike 20 miles and summit a dozen mountains to kill it. We all have different reasons why we hunt and we all have different methods how we hunt, but none of that should be a part of this conversation, ethics is a different conversation.

It sounds like he had landowner permission and WDFW permission to shoot the bull, unless that is proven false in court it may be pretty hard to convict him of breaking the law. The question is did he violate the law or not, in my opinion we should let the court figure out the truth!

(These comments are my personal opinion, Hunting-Washington is an internet service provider and has taken no official position on this issue.)

Hunters just like to bring down other hunters for some reason.  They claim it's not jealousy but I see that in many responses on this thread.  The moral hunt police are the most hypocritical people I meet.  Those that claim and preach they follow the law and bash someone that makes a mistake only makes me more suspicious of them.  It's no different than the preacher or politician railing against gay people.  Yep, they are gay.  I see it time after time in my profession with hunting charges.  They get up and say to the judge they teach hunter ed, work for WDFW,, never break the law, etc. in front of the judge.

Unlawful Big Game hunting encompasses a lot of different types of conduct.  Whether you have a tag but are just out of the unit, tag an animal later, tag it for someone else, etc.  I'm still maintaining probably half the people calling out TR have done this or a Title 77 charge at some point in their life.  Those that preach the loudest are probably the biggest offenders.  I've hunted with zillions of people over the years and tons on Huntwa.  So has Bearpaw and I bet he sees small issues daily.  Maybe they don't have their hunter orange on, have their clip loaded in the car, etc.  Most guys cut a corner here and there but maybe not that serious of a crime.  Do the best you can and they are so confusing your bound to error into an issue you didn't realize.  Lots of archers don't have the proper arrow for their bow under the law.

So, preach to me about how you have never broke a law before hunting...   :rolleyes:

Pope, you seem to be a very reasonable guy. I don't recall seeing a post you made that I don't agree with. I think you nailed it on this one. I have been told a guy who has been very vocal on this and many other forums on this issue has had more than one legal issue himself with game laws. Is that type of thing public information? I don't know where to find it? If it is public info I would like to know how to find it so if it was posted here no rules were broken by posting personal information.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on June 06, 2016, 07:17:28 PM
I'm still wondering why the call to wdfw was made? What in the regs would lead anyone to believe that the tag in hand might be valid for where they were? We're they unclear as to what unit they were in or were they unclear if 334 was available for the taking of branched bulls? I know I read about the question being asked about if a modern rifle could be used, but what else was asked?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 06, 2016, 07:21:08 PM

In the 2016 regs unit 334 is listed under modern firearm for true spike bull. So should the guy that shoots  a spike bull with a rifle in that unit be ticketed because it is actually a firearms restricted area? Should he have known this is a restricted area even though the regs have it listed for modern firearm?

It's always the hunter's responsibility to know ALL the rules and regulations for the unit he is hunting.

Was that really a serious question?

And for the record I agree it is the hunters responsibility to know the laws. For me personally if I have a question on legality I would think I did my due diligence if I called the WDFW and got an answer to my question.

Let's say someone this season Looks at the regs and sees unit 334 says it's open for modern to shoot a spike. Then calls WDFW to verify they can shoot a spike with a centerfire rifle in that unit, and are told it's fine. Do you believe A, they should be sited for that, and B be labeled all over these forums a poacher?

Yes,
It's also in the regs that its restricted. You can't choose which regs your want to read and follow. If they can read certain parts of the regs they can read the whole thing. I don't understand the selective reasoning by you.

 :yeah: they should be cited and "it depends" whether or not they should be labeled a poacher.   If it was negligence, as in an oversight or just poor judgement in failing to read and understand the restrictions on the tag they are holding and/or the Unit they are hunting in, then it could be that they just screwed up.  It could be an isolated case of using poor judgement. 

However if they participated in a deliberate and systematic orchestration of a scheme by which they could take an animal they know (like have been told numerous times), or should know (like in have been told numerous times but are too thick headed), is not legal in the GMU they are hunting in...  then they are a poacher and an unrepentant poacher at that.

By saying they "knew" and we're told is dishonest at best, but more like slanderous in reality. But it your repeat it enough a few of the other city guys might believe another city guy.......
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: idahohuntr on June 06, 2016, 07:24:25 PM

In the 2016 regs unit 334 is listed under modern firearm for true spike bull. So should the guy that shoots  a spike bull with a rifle in that unit be ticketed because it is actually a firearms restricted area? Should he have known this is a restricted area even though the regs have it listed for modern firearm?

It's always the hunter's responsibility to know ALL the rules and regulations for the unit he is hunting.

Was that really a serious question?

And for the record I agree it is the hunters responsibility to know the laws. For me personally if I have a question on legality I would think I did my due diligence if I called the WDFW and got an answer to my question.

Let's say someone this season Looks at the regs and sees unit 334 says it's open for modern to shoot a spike. Then calls WDFW to verify they can shoot a spike with a centerfire rifle in that unit, and are told it's fine. Do you believe A, they should be sited for that, and B be labeled all over these forums a poacher?

Yes,
It's also in the regs that its restricted. You can't choose which regs your want to read and follow. If they can read certain parts of the regs they can read the whole thing. I don't understand the selective reasoning by you.
I've asked numerous times...what prompted you guys to call wdfw? Something someone told you, something you read in the regs, the feeling that bulls don't get that big living in a field where seasons are ever open for them? You obviously realized something was not right...what was it?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on June 06, 2016, 07:25:49 PM

In the 2016 regs unit 334 is listed under modern firearm for true spike bull. So should the guy that shoots  a spike bull with a rifle in that unit be ticketed because it is actually a firearms restricted area? Should he have known this is a restricted area even though the regs have it listed for modern firearm?

It's always the hunter's responsibility to know ALL the rules and regulations for the unit he is hunting.

Was that really a serious question?

And for the record I agree it is the hunters responsibility to know the laws. For me personally if I have a question on legality I would think I did my due diligence if I called the WDFW and got an answer to my question.

Let's say someone this season Looks at the regs and sees unit 334 says it's open for modern to shoot a spike. Then calls WDFW to verify they can shoot a spike with a centerfire rifle in that unit, and are told it's fine. Do you believe A, they should be sited for that, and B be labeled all over these forums a poacher?

Yes,
It's also in the regs that its restricted. You can't choose which regs your want to read and follow. If they can read certain parts of the regs they can read the whole thing. I don't understand the selective reasoning by you.

 :yeah: they should be cited and "it depends" whether or not they should be labeled a poacher.   If it was negligence, as in an oversight or just poor judgement in failing to read and understand the restrictions on the tag they are holding and/or the Unit they are hunting in, then it could be that they just screwed up.  It could be an isolated case of using poor judgement. 

However if they participated in a deliberate and systematic orchestration of a scheme by which they could take an animal they know (like have been told numerous times), or should know (like in have been told numerous times but are too thick headed), is not legal in the GMU they are hunting in...  then they are a poacher and an unrepentant poacher at that.

By saying they "knew" and we're told is dishonest at best, but more like slanderous in reality. But it your repeat it enough a few of the other city guys might believe another city guy.......

You set up a hypothetical situation and invited response and I responded to the hypothetical you set up. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bullkllr on June 06, 2016, 07:31:41 PM
I can see trying to defend a friend, or whatever. But come on...from the outside looking in, this does not look like a simple mistake, an oversight, or anything that could  possibly be legitimized with a phone call.

And compared to the several other websites I have seen this issue addressed, the discussion here has been calm and civilized.

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Reidus on June 06, 2016, 07:36:53 PM
Seems like a guy could go to a game farm and shoot a bigger one for a whole lot cheaper and a whole lot less hassle.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 06, 2016, 07:41:05 PM

In the 2016 regs unit 334 is listed under modern firearm for true spike bull. So should the guy that shoots  a spike bull with a rifle in that unit be ticketed because it is actually a firearms restricted area? Should he have known this is a restricted area even though the regs have it listed for modern firearm?

It's always the hunter's responsibility to know ALL the rules and regulations for the unit he is hunting.

Was that really a serious question?

And for the record I agree it is the hunters responsibility to know the laws. For me personally if I have a question on legality I would think I did my due diligence if I called the WDFW and got an answer to my question.

Let's say someone this season Looks at the regs and sees unit 334 says it's open for modern to shoot a spike. Then calls WDFW to verify they can shoot a spike with a centerfire rifle in that unit, and are told it's fine. Do you believe A, they should be sited for that, and B be labeled all over these forums a poacher?

Yes,
It's also in the regs that its restricted. You can't choose which regs your want to read and follow. If they can read certain parts of the regs they can read the whole thing. I don't understand the selective reasoning by you.

I don't see how that is selective reasoning?  If I have a question, you are saying calling WDFW for clarification is not enough?  Let's say I can't read because of a disability so I call WDFW to ask about the rules, I a a poacher if they give me bad info?

Most logical people would and do agree a person who is proactive and calls WDFW  to make sure they are legal should be able to trust that info. Guess there is always going to be that jealous crowd of guys like you and a few others on here that will jump on a witchhunt.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JimmyHoffa on June 06, 2016, 07:42:07 PM
Seems like a guy could go to a game farm and shoot a bigger one for a whole lot cheaper and a whole lot less hassle.
I believe that would only qualify for SCI, not B&C.  The bull in question I think will be eligible for B&C for muzzleloader.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 06, 2016, 07:50:25 PM
(http://).....So, preach to me about how you have never broke a law before hunting...   :rolleyes:


Pope, there may be some people butt hurt about his money.  And you are right, most will have broken game laws somewhere along the line.

This is a Clintonian what’s the definition of “is” type of argument that is being made. It’s a legalistic bit of maneuvering, a charade. People aren’t dumb. They can read the regs.  It’s plain as day that  this discussion of true vs regular spike was an attempt to thread a legal needle.   They were hoping, angling and prying to get someone at WDFW to contort the regs into a pretzel in order to claim the unit was open to branch bull hunting. Not caring that even if they would say it’s “ok” that it should never be done.  That particular bull, where it lived, should not have been shot as a matter of good public relations and decency.

To the others that think his reputation is at stake in the court case.  No, it isn’t.  A very popular animal, open to public view and regularly photographed, safe from any legal hunting pressure, living in wide open alfalfa fields, no longer behaving like a wild elk in or out of elk season was shot with the ease of a killing a heifer by a someone who paid $50k+ for the privilege, observed now by hunters who see the rules as clear as water.  The harm to reputation has nothing to do with the case outcome. Many legal, yet repugnant, things can be done.  If you know that bull has notoriety and is loved in the community and you wiggle around a way to shoot it anyway right on that open field, you are putting a stick right in those people’s eye.  There’s no way around that fact. A call may insulate you from legal penalty, but it can do nothing to protect someone from the public’s judgment.

A satirical description of the hunt:

I drove up on the black top and parked.  A school bus and a mom in her minivan passed by.  Still in the cab, the wily creature was hard to make out as it stood in the thickest cover, the deepest 10 inches of alfalfa this field was choked with.  I put down my road mug of starbucks and the second half of my bear claw on the dash. I pulled up my Swaro 10x50’s, yep, that’s the bull. He was a bit faint, but at 100 yards I was able to pick him out through the thick stuff.  My door closing behind me with a thud I made for the back of the truck.  My buddy Zeb helped and loaded the gun.  My friends and I all wore jeans and flannel shirts so that we would fit in the bull’s natural environment. Just another farmer  over here, no worries mr elk (at least that’s the theory). I could hear traffic and children’s voices in the distance of this wild place.  Next we came up with a plan to get on this beast.  After much debate…. I began to walk straight at him.  One, two, three steps, stopped.  Forgot my hat on the hood of the truck. Darn it!!! I hope this doesn’t spoil the stalk.  I went back for my hat when it occurred to me that I hadn’t finished my danish so I opened the rig and stuffed the 2nd half in my mouth and pulled my hat down tight for the stalk.  My pulse rate was easily 70 now with the anticipation. I pulled up my Swaros again, there he was, now laying down and chewing cud in the gnarly thicket, looking straight at me.  Though he was unable to see me in the extreme farmer break up pattern we’re wearing.  Two, three, four steps.  I’m getting sweaty now and a little nervous so I take a couple minutes to calm down.  Five…. That oughta do it. BANG. Flop.

YEAAAAAAAAAH!!!!!!  WHAHOOO!!!!!  What a hunt, what a great animal…!!   Hi Mrs Johnson, we’ll get it out of the field in just a minute, nice dress you have on, is that paisley?

Doesn't seem most on here agree with this post. They are just fine when another member on here helps kill a yard bull that some called Cupcake and even used bait. It was also a very well known bull. In fact your story you came up with much more resembles that situation than the one we are talking about here.if one shouldn't have been done for public relations and decency, the other one should definitely not have either. But the some on here call Cupcake a trophy, but not the other....
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on June 06, 2016, 07:53:05 PM
Speaking for myself...

I see a lot of hatred of the fact that the guy has been successful in life. This is America, we all have a choice in what direction we take with our lives and we all have the option of doing what it takes to make a better living so we can afford to buy these tags. The irony that nobody considers is that the money from these special tags helps fund wildlife management and ultimately keeps the price lower for everyone else to hunt cheaper.  :dunno:

FACT, many comments involve: his wealth; that he got a big bull most thought was off-limits; or that it was easy to shoot the bull, he didn't have to hike 20 miles and summit a dozen mountains to kill it. We all have different reasons why we hunt and we all have different methods how we hunt, but none of that should be a part of this conversation, ethics is a different conversation.

It sounds like he had landowner permission and WDFW permission to shoot the bull, unless that is proven false in court it may be pretty hard to convict him of breaking the law. The question is did he violate the law or not, in my opinion we should let the court figure out the truth!

(These comments are my personal opinion, Hunting-Washington is an internet service provider and has taken no official position on this issue.)

Hunters just like to bring down other hunters for some reason.  They claim it's not jealousy but I see that in many responses on this thread.  The moral hunt police are the most hypocritical people I meet.  Those that claim and preach they follow the law and bash someone that makes a mistake only makes me more suspicious of them.  It's no different than the preacher or politician railing against gay people.  Yep, they are gay.  I see it time after time in my profession with hunting charges.  They get up and say to the judge they teach hunter ed, work for WDFW,, never break the law, etc. in front of the judge.

Unlawful Big Game hunting encompasses a lot of different types of conduct.  Whether you have a tag but are just out of the unit, tag an animal later, tag it for someone else, etc.  I'm still maintaining probably half the people calling out TR have done this or a Title 77 charge at some point in their life.  Those that preach the loudest are probably the biggest offenders.  I've hunted with zillions of people over the years and tons on Huntwa.  So has Bearpaw and I bet he sees small issues daily.  Maybe they don't have their hunter orange on, have their clip loaded in the car, etc.  Most guys cut a corner here and there but maybe not that serious of a crime.  Do the best you can and they are so confusing your bound to error into an issue you didn't realize.  Lots of archers don't have the proper arrow for their bow under the law.

So, preach to me about how you have never broke a law before hunting...   :rolleyes:

Pope, you seem to be a very reasonable guy. I don't recall seeing a post you made that I don't agree with. I think you nailed it on this one. I have been told a guy who has been very vocal on this and many other forums on this issue has had more than one legal issue himself with game laws. Is that type of thing public information? I don't know where to find it? If it is public info  I would like to know how to find it so it it was posted here no rules were broken by posting personal information.

I agree, pope is level minded, that's why it's dumb y some of his buddys are so gung ho to hang riechert, yet it's funny they hang onto his success pics like little high school girls....

The second part, y as that would be epic, I'm sure very few here have yet to scew the rules while hunting, or fishing.....
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on June 06, 2016, 07:55:45 PM
Seems like a guy could go to a game farm and shoot a bigger one for a whole lot cheaper and a whole lot less hassle.
I believe that would only qualify for SCI, not B&C.  The bull in question I think will be eligible for B&C for muzzleloader.

I'd simply r a t her have Washington's wildlife benefit from his $$$$ than some high fence outfit... who cares about record books....
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: snake on June 06, 2016, 08:04:38 PM
The money does not go to conservation.  Sorry to break your hearts.  Just for fun, find a law you consider confusing, call 2 or 3 wdfw offices and ask them for an answer.  I guarantee  you will get more than one answer.  I have done it many times.  Sometimes they even tell me it depends on the game wardens interpretation of the rule whether you will get a ticket or not."
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on June 06, 2016, 08:23:10 PM
The money does not go to conservation.  Sorry to break your hearts.  Just for fun, find a law you consider confusing, call 2 or 3 wdfw offices and ask them for an answer.  I guarantee  you will get more than one answer.  I have done it many times.  Sometimes they even tell me it depends on the game wardens interpretation of the rule whether you will get a ticket or not."

Are you sure the money doesn't go to conservation?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: NOCK NOCK on June 06, 2016, 08:57:07 PM
Here is a scenario,  Speed limit is 60mph from point A to point B, (point B is their destination)

1. A person drives their car from A to B @ 80mph. Did they break the law? Was this action illegal or legal?

2. A person drives their car from A to B @ 80mph. Before arriving at their destination, a cop pulls them over and cites them with a speeding infraction. Did they break the law???  Again, illegal or legal???

This is why I believe most on here are furious with the happenings of this killing.

1. Of course speeding is illegal, just because you got away with it....does not make it the right thing to do.
2. Of course they broke law by speeding.


Also I want to address a couple things that are repeated on here over and over again.

Jealousy... I'll bite......YES I am jealous of TR's wealth, but heck I am jealous of anyone who has more money than I do. :chuckle: Money can buy a guy a lot of fun, and who doesn't like to have fun?

Money cannot buy a person love or happiness(get both those from my wife :tup:)
Am I jealous that I can not afford to buy expensive hunting opportunity's like TR?  Nope.  My idea of a fun hunt is drastically different than this Bullwinkle killing.

Hunting: The act of searching for something or someone. How a person defines hunting varies.
My passion is hunting, all kinds;  game animals, mushrooms, sheds, gold panning, metal detecting, rock hounding, geo-caching, anything I can get outside and search for I'm addicted to it. If these things were laying around everywhere, what fun would that be?  To me, what happened with Bullwinkle was not hunting by the trigger man (his paid help did the hunting), it was just killing.

Do I believe this "hunt" was illegal?  Yep
Do I feel TR will get away with it.  Yep, But that doesn't make it right. IMHO 
PS: I hope I am wrong.
 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: emac on June 06, 2016, 09:16:06 PM
I can see trying to defend a friend, or whatever. But come on...from the outside looking in, this does not look like a simple mistake, an oversight, or anything that could  possibly be legitimized with a phone call.

And compared to the several other websites I have seen this issue addressed, the discussion here has been calm and civilized.
What other sites is this being discussed on. I wanna see other train wrecks

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on June 06, 2016, 09:18:55 PM


Here is a scenario,  Speed limit is 60mph from point A to point B, (point B is their destination)

1. A person drives their car from A to B @ 80mph. Did they break the law? Was this action illegal or legal?

2. A person drives their car from A to B @ 80mph. Before arriving at their destination, a cop pulls them over and cites them with a speeding infraction. Did they break the law???  Again, illegal or legal???

This is why I believe most on here are furious with the happenings of this killing.

1. Of course speeding is illegal, just because you got away with it....does not make it the right thing to do.
2. Of course they broke law by speeding.

What about person C who calls an officer before leaving on his trip and asks if it is okay to drive 80 from point A to B?  And the officer says go ahead?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: NOCK NOCK on June 06, 2016, 09:25:53 PM


Here is a scenario,  Speed limit is 60mph from point A to point B, (point B is their destination)

1. A person drives their car from A to B @ 80mph. Did they break the law? Was this action illegal or legal?

2. A person drives their car from A to B @ 80mph. Before arriving at their destination, a cop pulls them over and cites them with a speeding infraction. Did they break the law???  Again, illegal or legal???

This is why I believe most on here are furious with the happenings of this killing.

1. Of course speeding is illegal, just because you got away with it....does not make it the right thing to do.
2. Of course they broke law by speeding.

What about person C who calls an officer before leaving on his trip and asks if it is okay to drive 80 from point A to B?  And the officer says go ahead?


LOL, Well lets say this was in WA ST. What state is the officer from?  Oregon?  Does he have jurisdiction?  Did this officer author the law?  Was he jealous?  Or just hunting for some revenue?
A law is a law, break it and it's still illegal.
If I tell ya to jump off a cliff with no parachute, are you going to?   Trust me you'll be fine.  :chuckle: :chuckle: :twocents:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Colville on June 06, 2016, 09:26:14 PM
Kiticass,

Sure sign one has a crap argument? Pointing at other peoples bad behavior to defend your own.  Not yours litterally of course.

I know zip of the other hunt. I'll defer that if a comparably public, renown bull in an area that has no season for such was killed, heck even if there was a season, but killed in a green field,like a cow, there's no honor in it. Legality? Sure or maybe i dont know that story. But theres nothing to be proud of and depending, something to be ashamed of.

I cant understand this greed to kill an adored public critter at the cost of all hunters reps. How could you ever tell the story to someone looking at the mount??  "Yep, got that off I82 in some alfalfa. Braced the muzzy on a spigot and shot him at 40 yards. He still had a mouth of greens when we got to em. What a hoot....the memories"
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 06, 2016, 09:27:05 PM


Here is a scenario,  Speed limit is 60mph from point A to point B, (point B is their destination)

1. A person drives their car from A to B @ 80mph. Did they break the law? Was this action illegal or legal?

2. A person drives their car from A to B @ 80mph. Before arriving at their destination, a cop pulls them over and cites them with a speeding infraction. Did they break the law???  Again, illegal or legal???

This is why I believe most on here are furious with the happenings of this killing.

1. Of course speeding is illegal, just because you got away with it....does not make it the right thing to do.
2. Of course they broke law by speeding.

What about person C who calls an officer before leaving on his trip and asks if it is okay to drive 80 from point A to B?  And the officer says go ahead?

And the officer was told he was on speaker phone when the conversation started and was told there were several people there listening to what he said........
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: klickman on June 06, 2016, 09:27:43 PM
(http://).....So, preach to me about how you have never broke a law before hunting...   :rolleyes:


Pope, there may be some people butt hurt about his money.  And you are right, most will have broken game laws somewhere along the line.

This is a Clintonian what’s the definition of “is” type of argument that is being made. It’s a legalistic bit of maneuvering, a charade. People aren’t dumb. They can read the regs.  It’s plain as day that  this discussion of true vs regular spike was an attempt to thread a legal needle.   They were hoping, angling and prying to get someone at WDFW to contort the regs into a pretzel in order to claim the unit was open to branch bull hunting. Not caring that even if they would say it’s “ok” that it should never be done.  That particular bull, where it lived, should not have been shot as a matter of good public relations and decency.

To the others that think his reputation is at stake in the court case.  No, it isn’t.  A very popular animal, open to public view and regularly photographed, safe from any legal hunting pressure, living in wide open alfalfa fields, no longer behaving like a wild elk in or out of elk season was shot with the ease of a killing a heifer by a someone who paid $50k+ for the privilege, observed now by hunters who see the rules as clear as water.  The harm to reputation has nothing to do with the case outcome. Many legal, yet repugnant, things can be done.  If you know that bull has notoriety and is loved in the community and you wiggle around a way to shoot it anyway right on that open field, you are putting a stick right in those people’s eye.  There’s no way around that fact. A call may insulate you from legal penalty, but it can do nothing to protect someone from the public’s judgment.

A satirical description of the hunt:

I drove up on the black top and parked.  A school bus and a mom in her minivan passed by.  Still in the cab, the wily creature was hard to make out as it stood in the thickest cover, the deepest 10 inches of alfalfa this field was choked with.  I put down my road mug of starbucks and the second half of my bear claw on the dash. I pulled up my Swaro 10x50’s, yep, that’s the bull. He was a bit faint, but at 100 yards I was able to pick him out through the thick stuff.  My door closing behind me with a thud I made for the back of the truck.  My buddy Zeb helped and loaded the gun.  My friends and I all wore jeans and flannel shirts so that we would fit in the bull’s natural environment. Just another farmer  over here, no worries mr elk (at least that’s the theory). I could hear traffic and children’s voices in the distance of this wild place.  Next we came up with a plan to get on this beast.  After much debate…. I began to walk straight at him.  One, two, three steps, stopped.  Forgot my hat on the hood of the truck. Darn it!!! I hope this doesn’t spoil the stalk.  I went back for my hat when it occurred to me that I hadn’t finished my danish so I opened the rig and stuffed the 2nd half in my mouth and pulled my hat down tight for the stalk.  My pulse rate was easily 70 now with the anticipation. I pulled up my Swaros again, there he was, now laying down and chewing cud in the gnarly thicket, looking straight at me.  Though he was unable to see me in the extreme farmer break up pattern we’re wearing.  Two, three, four steps.  I’m getting sweaty now and a little nervous so I take a couple minutes to calm down.  Five…. That oughta do it. BANG. Flop.

YEAAAAAAAAAH!!!!!!  WHAHOOO!!!!!  What a hunt, what a great animal…!!   Hi Mrs Johnson, we’ll get it out of the field in just a minute, nice dress you have on, is that paisley?

Doesn't seem most on here agree with this post. They are just fine when another member on here helps kill a yard bull that some called Cupcake and even used bait. It was also a very well known bull. In fact your story you came up with much more resembles that situation than the one we are talking about here.if one shouldn't have been done for public relations and decency, the other one should definitely not have either. But the some on here call Cupcake a trophy, but not the other....

Where you on this hunt?  How do you know what happened?  You question everyone who goes against TR yet you continue to try to muddy the waters about a completely LEGAL hunt. It just reeks of jealousy. Maybe it's because a big payday was missed when another hunter shot the other bull TR was after????


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 06, 2016, 09:36:20 PM
(http://).....So, preach to me about how you have never broke a law before hunting...   :rolleyes:


Pope, there may be some people butt hurt about his money.  And you are right, most will have broken game laws somewhere along the line.

This is a Clintonian what’s the definition of “is” type of argument that is being made. It’s a legalistic bit of maneuvering, a charade. People aren’t dumb. They can read the regs.  It’s plain as day that  this discussion of true vs regular spike was an attempt to thread a legal needle.   They were hoping, angling and prying to get someone at WDFW to contort the regs into a pretzel in order to claim the unit was open to branch bull hunting. Not caring that even if they would say it’s “ok” that it should never be done.  That particular bull, where it lived, should not have been shot as a matter of good public relations and decency.

To the others that think his reputation is at stake in the court case.  No, it isn’t.  A very popular animal, open to public view and regularly photographed, safe from any legal hunting pressure, living in wide open alfalfa fields, no longer behaving like a wild elk in or out of elk season was shot with the ease of a killing a heifer by a someone who paid $50k+ for the privilege, observed now by hunters who see the rules as clear as water.  The harm to reputation has nothing to do with the case outcome. Many legal, yet repugnant, things can be done.  If you know that bull has notoriety and is loved in the community and you wiggle around a way to shoot it anyway right on that open field, you are putting a stick right in those people’s eye.  There’s no way around that fact. A call may insulate you from legal penalty, but it can do nothing to protect someone from the public’s judgment.

A satirical description of the hunt:

I drove up on the black top and parked.  A school bus and a mom in her minivan passed by.  Still in the cab, the wily creature was hard to make out as it stood in the thickest cover, the deepest 10 inches of alfalfa this field was choked with.  I put down my road mug of starbucks and the second half of my bear claw on the dash. I pulled up my Swaro 10x50’s, yep, that’s the bull. He was a bit faint, but at 100 yards I was able to pick him out through the thick stuff.  My door closing behind me with a thud I made for the back of the truck.  My buddy Zeb helped and loaded the gun.  My friends and I all wore jeans and flannel shirts so that we would fit in the bull’s natural environment. Just another farmer  over here, no worries mr elk (at least that’s the theory). I could hear traffic and children’s voices in the distance of this wild place.  Next we came up with a plan to get on this beast.  After much debate…. I began to walk straight at him.  One, two, three steps, stopped.  Forgot my hat on the hood of the truck. Darn it!!! I hope this doesn’t spoil the stalk.  I went back for my hat when it occurred to me that I hadn’t finished my danish so I opened the rig and stuffed the 2nd half in my mouth and pulled my hat down tight for the stalk.  My pulse rate was easily 70 now with the anticipation. I pulled up my Swaros again, there he was, now laying down and chewing cud in the gnarly thicket, looking straight at me.  Though he was unable to see me in the extreme farmer break up pattern we’re wearing.  Two, three, four steps.  I’m getting sweaty now and a little nervous so I take a couple minutes to calm down.  Five…. That oughta do it. BANG. Flop.

YEAAAAAAAAAH!!!!!!  WHAHOOO!!!!!  What a hunt, what a great animal…!!   Hi Mrs Johnson, we’ll get it out of the field in just a minute, nice dress you have on, is that paisley?

Doesn't seem most on here agree with this post. They are just fine when another member on here helps kill a yard bull that some called Cupcake and even used bait. It was also a very well known bull. In fact your story you came up with much more resembles that situation than the one we are talking about here.if one shouldn't have been done for public relations and decency, the other one should definitely not have either. But the some on here call Cupcake a trophy, but not the other....

Where you on this hunt?  How do you know what happened?  You question everyone who goes against TR yet you continue to try to muddy the waters about a completely LEGAL hunt. It just reeks of jealousy. Maybe it's because a big payday was missed when another hunter shot the other bull TR was after????


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No I wasn't there but did speak with someone who saw it. Your right it was legal and I don't have a problem with it. I was quoting a post that had commented about shooting a field bull and the trophy factor in that, I was just pointing out how some on here will call one a trophy and not the other.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: M_ray on June 06, 2016, 09:48:20 PM

In the 2016 regs unit 334 is listed under modern firearm for true spike bull. So should the guy that shoots  a spike bull with a rifle in that unit be ticketed because it is actually a firearms restricted area? Should he have known this is a restricted area even though the regs have it listed for modern firearm?

It's always the hunter's responsibility to know ALL the rules and regulations for the unit he is hunting.

Was that really a serious question?

And for the record I agree it is the hunters responsibility to know the laws. For me personally if I have a question on legality I would think I did my due diligence if I called the WDFW and got an answer to my question.

Let's say someone this season Looks at the regs and sees unit 334 says it's open for modern to shoot a spike. Then calls WDFW to verify they can shoot a spike with a centerfire rifle in that unit, and are told it's fine. Do you believe A, they should be sited for that, and B be labeled all over these forums a poacher?

Yes,
It's also in the regs that its restricted. You can't choose which regs your want to read and follow. If they can read certain parts of the regs they can read the whole thing. I don't understand the selective reasoning by you.

I don't see how that is selective reasoning?  If I have a question, you are saying calling WDFW for clarification is not enough?  Let's say I can't read because of a disability so I call WDFW to ask about the rules, I a a poacher if they give me bad info?

Most logical people would and do agree a person who is proactive and calls WDFW  to make sure they are legal should be able to trust that info. Guess there is always going to be that jealous crowd of guys like you and a few others on here that will jump on a witchhunt.

The calls shouldn't even have to have been made, at least us city guys understand what we are reading and don't need to make a call to figure this one out! Perhaps if you had stayed in Renton you wouldn't be having difficulty understanding that 334 isn't open to the harvesting of branch bulls?

P.S. I have told you the name of the person who told the party to please not kill that bull so you are wrong ... They did know this bull was in 334.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: time2hunt on June 06, 2016, 09:57:52 PM
M-Ray
I followed through on my part and went and talked with are mutual friend and I think you called him the night what were his words to you?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on June 06, 2016, 10:14:11 PM
If I had the gov tag, or raffle tag, I'd think I could hunt in said units, but hey, I'm just a big dumb lewis county boy, not neatly as savvy as the city slickers up north....thank God for the pierce and king county folks...
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bullkllr on June 06, 2016, 10:54:36 PM
I can see trying to defend a friend, or whatever. But come on...from the outside looking in, this does not look like a simple mistake, an oversight, or anything that could  possibly be legitimized with a phone call.

And compared to the several other websites I have seen this issue addressed, the discussion here has been calm and civilized.
What other sites is this being discussed on. I wanna see other train wrecks

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
Several pages here:
http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/11165637/Re:_Charges_Filed!!!__-_2015_W (http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/11165637/Re:_Charges_Filed!!!__-_2015_W)


In the comments, if you haven't seen this:
http://www.yakimaherald.com/news/local/hunter-facing-charges-after-death-of-beloved-elk-named-bullwinkle/article_844ec8ac-1a65-11e6-8639-53981ae0fc80.html (http://www.yakimaherald.com/news/local/hunter-facing-charges-after-death-of-beloved-elk-named-bullwinkle/article_844ec8ac-1a65-11e6-8639-53981ae0fc80.html)

A bit here; nothing new:
http://www.ifish.net/board/showthread.php?t=1243914 (http://www.ifish.net/board/showthread.php?t=1243914)

Letter to the editor, and comments:
http://www.dailyrecordnews.com/members/letter-as-a-hunter-disgusted-with-killing-of-bullwinkle/article_af72f16e-1e09-11e6-af5a-134c6e038aed.html (http://www.dailyrecordnews.com/members/letter-as-a-hunter-disgusted-with-killing-of-bullwinkle/article_af72f16e-1e09-11e6-af5a-134c6e038aed.html)

Hard to imagine a 'win', regardless of what the court decides.

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: mfswallace on June 06, 2016, 11:23:43 PM
I'm wondering why the case is even being prosecuted if wdfw gave permission. Why would they even investigate? Is it simply because wdfw really had no legal authority?  Sure would be nice to know the exact wording of the questions and conversation with wdfw. Too bad there isn't anyone in the know responding to this thread to put and end to the speculation. ..........

I think the last thing the WDFW wanted was for this case to get prosecuted.  That was a decision made by the county due to outside pressure they were receiving i believe . As far a the WDFW investigation, to the best of my knowledge not a single person in the party was even interviewed. That seems really strange to me if there truly was a investigation done.


Who were the people in the party??
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: grundy53 on June 07, 2016, 05:04:05 AM
(http://).....So, preach to me about how you have never broke a law before hunting...   :rolleyes:


Pope, there may be some people butt hurt about his money.  And you are right, most will have broken game laws somewhere along the line.

This is a Clintonian what’s the definition of “is” type of argument that is being made. It’s a legalistic bit of maneuvering, a charade. People aren’t dumb. They can read the regs.  It’s plain as day that  this discussion of true vs regular spike was an attempt to thread a legal needle.   They were hoping, angling and prying to get someone at WDFW to contort the regs into a pretzel in order to claim the unit was open to branch bull hunting. Not caring that even if they would say it’s “ok” that it should never be done.  That particular bull, where it lived, should not have been shot as a matter of good public relations and decency.

To the others that think his reputation is at stake in the court case.  No, it isn’t.  A very popular animal, open to public view and regularly photographed, safe from any legal hunting pressure, living in wide open alfalfa fields, no longer behaving like a wild elk in or out of elk season was shot with the ease of a killing a heifer by a someone who paid $50k+ for the privilege, observed now by hunters who see the rules as clear as water.  The harm to reputation has nothing to do with the case outcome. Many legal, yet repugnant, things can be done.  If you know that bull has notoriety and is loved in the community and you wiggle around a way to shoot it anyway right on that open field, you are putting a stick right in those people’s eye.  There’s no way around that fact. A call may insulate you from legal penalty, but it can do nothing to protect someone from the public’s judgment.

A satirical description of the hunt:

I drove up on the black top and parked.  A school bus and a mom in her minivan passed by.  Still in the cab, the wily creature was hard to make out as it stood in the thickest cover, the deepest 10 inches of alfalfa this field was choked with.  I put down my road mug of starbucks and the second half of my bear claw on the dash. I pulled up my Swaro 10x50’s, yep, that’s the bull. He was a bit faint, but at 100 yards I was able to pick him out through the thick stuff.  My door closing behind me with a thud I made for the back of the truck.  My buddy Zeb helped and loaded the gun.  My friends and I all wore jeans and flannel shirts so that we would fit in the bull’s natural environment. Just another farmer  over here, no worries mr elk (at least that’s the theory). I could hear traffic and children’s voices in the distance of this wild place.  Next we came up with a plan to get on this beast.  After much debate…. I began to walk straight at him.  One, two, three steps, stopped.  Forgot my hat on the hood of the truck. Darn it!!! I hope this doesn’t spoil the stalk.  I went back for my hat when it occurred to me that I hadn’t finished my danish so I opened the rig and stuffed the 2nd half in my mouth and pulled my hat down tight for the stalk.  My pulse rate was easily 70 now with the anticipation. I pulled up my Swaros again, there he was, now laying down and chewing cud in the gnarly thicket, looking straight at me.  Though he was unable to see me in the extreme farmer break up pattern we’re wearing.  Two, three, four steps.  I’m getting sweaty now and a little nervous so I take a couple minutes to calm down.  Five…. That oughta do it. BANG. Flop.

YEAAAAAAAAAH!!!!!!  WHAHOOO!!!!!  What a hunt, what a great animal…!!   Hi Mrs Johnson, we’ll get it out of the field in just a minute, nice dress you have on, is that paisley?

Doesn't seem most on here agree with this post. They are just fine when another member on here helps kill a yard bull that some called Cupcake and even used bait. It was also a very well known bull. In fact your story you came up with much more resembles that situation than the one we are talking about here.if one shouldn't have been done for public relations and decency, the other one should definitely not have either. But the some on here call Cupcake a trophy, but not the other....

Where you on this hunt?  How do you know what happened?  You question everyone who goes against TR yet you continue to try to muddy the waters about a completely LEGAL hunt. It just reeks of jealousy. Maybe it's because a big payday was missed when another hunter shot the other bull TR was after????


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No I wasn't there but did speak with someone who saw it. Your right it was legal and I don't have a problem with it. I was quoting a post that had commented about shooting a field bull and the trophy factor in that, I was just pointing out how some on here will call one a trophy and not the other.
So you weren't even there yet you spout off like you actually know the truth ? You act like you're the only one that knows what actually happened, except you weren't there. You had to be told the story, so you don't even know how much of the story is actually true.

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Skyvalhunter on June 07, 2016, 05:40:57 AM
 :yike:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: HntnFsh on June 07, 2016, 06:04:21 AM


Here is a scenario,  Speed limit is 60mph from point A to point B, (point B is their destination)

1. A person drives their car from A to B @ 80mph. Did they break the law? Was this action illegal or legal?

2. A person drives their car from A to B @ 80mph. Before arriving at their destination, a cop pulls them over and cites them with a speeding infraction. Did they break the law???  Again, illegal or legal???

This is why I believe most on here are furious with the happenings of this killing.

1. Of course speeding is illegal, just because you got away with it....does not make it the right thing to do.
2. Of course they broke law by speeding.

What about person C who calls an officer before leaving on his trip and asks if it is okay to drive 80 from point A to B?  And the officer says go ahead?

And the officer was told he was on speaker phone when the conversation started and was told there were several people there listening to what he said........

 This comment is very interesting. If true, sounds like witnesses were wanted in case they got the answer they were looking for even if it was wrong. Why else would you need witnesses to a phone call about a question of the regs. I think most people that would make a phone call to try to clarify something WDFW would just make the call and then tell their buddies. "Yep, they said it was ok." Or "they said no, let go find another one." or something of the sort. Obviously some planning went into this one.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: M_ray on June 07, 2016, 06:08:43 AM
M-Ray
I followed through on my part and went and talked with are mutual friend and I think you called him the night what were his words to you?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

He told me that two years ago he asked you "please don't kill that bull" he said that you are right he had not seen you in awhile but admitted there is no question you know the boundary of the unit and the fan fare surrounding this bull. besides you said you weren't there right? So my comment should make no difference to you if you weren't part of the group?  :dunno:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on June 07, 2016, 06:22:07 AM
(http://).....So, preach to me about how you have never broke a law before hunting...   :rolleyes:


Pope, there may be some people butt hurt about his money.  And you are right, most will have broken game laws somewhere along the line.

This is a Clintonian what’s the definition of “is” type of argument that is being made. It’s a legalistic bit of maneuvering, a charade. People aren’t dumb. They can read the regs.  It’s plain as day that  this discussion of true vs regular spike was an attempt to thread a legal needle.   They were hoping, angling and prying to get someone at WDFW to contort the regs into a pretzel in order to claim the unit was open to branch bull hunting. Not caring that even if they would say it’s “ok” that it should never be done.  That particular bull, where it lived, should not have been shot as a matter of good public relations and decency.

To the others that think his reputation is at stake in the court case.  No, it isn’t.  A very popular animal, open to public view and regularly photographed, safe from any legal hunting pressure, living in wide open alfalfa fields, no longer behaving like a wild elk in or out of elk season was shot with the ease of a killing a heifer by a someone who paid $50k+ for the privilege, observed now by hunters who see the rules as clear as water.  The harm to reputation has nothing to do with the case outcome. Many legal, yet repugnant, things can be done.  If you know that bull has notoriety and is loved in the community and you wiggle around a way to shoot it anyway right on that open field, you are putting a stick right in those people’s eye.  There’s no way around that fact. A call may insulate you from legal penalty, but it can do nothing to protect someone from the public’s judgment.

A satirical description of the hunt:

I drove up on the black top and parked.  A school bus and a mom in her minivan passed by.  Still in the cab, the wily creature was hard to make out as it stood in the thickest cover, the deepest 10 inches of alfalfa this field was choked with.  I put down my road mug of starbucks and the second half of my bear claw on the dash. I pulled up my Swaro 10x50’s, yep, that’s the bull. He was a bit faint, but at 100 yards I was able to pick him out through the thick stuff.  My door closing behind me with a thud I made for the back of the truck.  My buddy Zeb helped and loaded the gun.  My friends and I all wore jeans and flannel shirts so that we would fit in the bull’s natural environment. Just another farmer  over here, no worries mr elk (at least that’s the theory). I could hear traffic and children’s voices in the distance of this wild place.  Next we came up with a plan to get on this beast.  After much debate…. I began to walk straight at him.  One, two, three steps, stopped.  Forgot my hat on the hood of the truck. Darn it!!! I hope this doesn’t spoil the stalk.  I went back for my hat when it occurred to me that I hadn’t finished my danish so I opened the rig and stuffed the 2nd half in my mouth and pulled my hat down tight for the stalk.  My pulse rate was easily 70 now with the anticipation. I pulled up my Swaros again, there he was, now laying down and chewing cud in the gnarly thicket, looking straight at me.  Though he was unable to see me in the extreme farmer break up pattern we’re wearing.  Two, three, four steps.  I’m getting sweaty now and a little nervous so I take a couple minutes to calm down.  Five…. That oughta do it. BANG. Flop.

YEAAAAAAAAAH!!!!!!  WHAHOOO!!!!!  What a hunt, what a great animal…!!   Hi Mrs Johnson, we’ll get it out of the field in just a minute, nice dress you have on, is that paisley?

Doesn't seem most on here agree with this post. They are just fine when another member on here helps kill a yard bull that some called Cupcake and even used bait. It was also a very well known bull. In fact your story you came up with much more resembles that situation than the one we are talking about here.if one shouldn't have been done for public relations and decency, the other one should definitely not have either. But the some on here call Cupcake a trophy, but not the other....

What you conveniently left out of your little yarn is:  How many other hunters held a 100% legal, no doubt about it, no questions have to be asked after reading the Game Regs, tag that was legal for that very same bull you call "cupcake?"   And on top of that:  How many LEGAL hunters had tried and failed to connect on this bull that you claim hung out in a front yard?  And also conspicuous in it's absence is how your attempt to flim flam your way onto that bull turned out.  Do you want that property owner in the dock as a character witness?  I think not. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: popeshawnpaul on June 07, 2016, 07:33:56 AM
Speaking for myself...

I see a lot of hatred of the fact that the guy has been successful in life. This is America, we all have a choice in what direction we take with our lives and we all have the option of doing what it takes to make a better living so we can afford to buy these tags. The irony that nobody considers is that the money from these special tags helps fund wildlife management and ultimately keeps the price lower for everyone else to hunt cheaper.  :dunno:

FACT, many comments involve: his wealth; that he got a big bull most thought was off-limits; or that it was easy to shoot the bull, he didn't have to hike 20 miles and summit a dozen mountains to kill it. We all have different reasons why we hunt and we all have different methods how we hunt, but none of that should be a part of this conversation, ethics is a different conversation.

It sounds like he had landowner permission and WDFW permission to shoot the bull, unless that is proven false in court it may be pretty hard to convict him of breaking the law. The question is did he violate the law or not, in my opinion we should let the court figure out the truth!

(These comments are my personal opinion, Hunting-Washington is an internet service provider and has taken no official position on this issue.)

Hunters just like to bring down other hunters for some reason.  They claim it's not jealousy but I see that in many responses on this thread.  The moral hunt police are the most hypocritical people I meet.  Those that claim and preach they follow the law and bash someone that makes a mistake only makes me more suspicious of them.  It's no different than the preacher or politician railing against gay people.  Yep, they are gay.  I see it time after time in my profession with hunting charges.  They get up and say to the judge they teach hunter ed, work for WDFW,, never break the law, etc. in front of the judge.

Unlawful Big Game hunting encompasses a lot of different types of conduct.  Whether you have a tag but are just out of the unit, tag an animal later, tag it for someone else, etc.  I'm still maintaining probably half the people calling out TR have done this or a Title 77 charge at some point in their life.  Those that preach the loudest are probably the biggest offenders.  I've hunted with zillions of people over the years and tons on Huntwa.  So has Bearpaw and I bet he sees small issues daily.  Maybe they don't have their hunter orange on, have their clip loaded in the car, etc.  Most guys cut a corner here and there but maybe not that serious of a crime.  Do the best you can and they are so confusing your bound to error into an issue you didn't realize.  Lots of archers don't have the proper arrow for their bow under the law.

So, preach to me about how you have never broke a law before hunting...   :rolleyes:

Pope, you seem to be a very reasonable guy. I don't recall seeing a post you made that I don't agree with. I think you nailed it on this one. I have been told a guy who has been very vocal on this and many other forums on this issue has had more than one legal issue himself with game laws. Is that type of thing public information? I don't know where to find it? If it is public info I would like to know how to find it so if it was posted here no rules were broken by posting personal information.

Most criminal history info is public info.  By the way, the police report on this case is public info.  The private info will be redacted but the report is public.  The only exception is when they try and say the investigation is not over with.  Why doesn't someone make a public records request and put the reports and affidavits on here?  Then at least we will have a summary of what people might testify to in court even if it's unchallenged statements made out of court that might change or get clarified under cross examination...
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on June 07, 2016, 08:36:50 AM
Where was this bull shot?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on June 07, 2016, 08:41:46 AM
Where was this bull shot?
Here's the real question.  What do you think of Kam Chancellor?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Woodchuck on June 07, 2016, 08:58:05 AM
Where was this bull shot?
I am guessing right behind the shoulder  :dunno:




Disclaimer: This my SWAG. Not even an opinion. This is not my version of a 14th hand version of a fairy tale. It is also not the opinion of the Hunt Wa. site, it's owner, or any of the moderators or admins, not even me. Scouts honor. :salute:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: popeshawnpaul on June 07, 2016, 09:22:46 AM
Where was this bull shot?

Just google it.  There are tons of news articles.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bob33 on June 07, 2016, 09:36:52 AM
Where was this bull shot?
North of the canal.

(The Panama canal.)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: emac on June 07, 2016, 09:37:58 AM
I can see trying to defend a friend, or whatever. But come on...from the outside looking in, this does not look like a simple mistake, an oversight, or anything that could  possibly be legitimized with a phone call.

And compared to the several other websites I have seen this issue addressed, the discussion here has been calm and civilized.
What other sites is this being discussed on. I wanna see other train wrecks

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
Several pages here:
http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/11165637/Re:_Charges_Filed!!!__-_2015_W (http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/11165637/Re:_Charges_Filed!!!__-_2015_W)


In the comments, if you haven't seen this:
http://www.yakimaherald.com/news/local/hunter-facing-charges-after-death-of-beloved-elk-named-bullwinkle/article_844ec8ac-1a65-11e6-8639-53981ae0fc80.html (http://www.yakimaherald.com/news/local/hunter-facing-charges-after-death-of-beloved-elk-named-bullwinkle/article_844ec8ac-1a65-11e6-8639-53981ae0fc80.html)

A bit here; nothing new:
http://www.ifish.net/board/showthread.php?t=1243914 (http://www.ifish.net/board/showthread.php?t=1243914)

Letter to the editor, and comments:
http://www.dailyrecordnews.com/members/letter-as-a-hunter-disgusted-with-killing-of-bullwinkle/article_af72f16e-1e09-11e6-af5a-134c6e038aed.html (http://www.dailyrecordnews.com/members/letter-as-a-hunter-disgusted-with-killing-of-bullwinkle/article_af72f16e-1e09-11e6-af5a-134c6e038aed.html)

Hard to imagine a 'win', regardless of what the court decides.
Thanks

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Alchase on June 07, 2016, 09:41:44 AM
(http://).....So, preach to me about how you have never broke a law before hunting...   :rolleyes:


Pope, there may be some people butt hurt about his money.  And you are right, most will have broken game laws somewhere along the line.

This is a Clintonian what’s the definition of “is” type of argument that is being made. It’s a legalistic bit of maneuvering, a charade. People aren’t dumb. They can read the regs.  It’s plain as day that  this discussion of true vs regular spike was an attempt to thread a legal needle.   They were hoping, angling and prying to get someone at WDFW to contort the regs into a pretzel in order to claim the unit was open to branch bull hunting. Not caring that even if they would say it’s “ok” that it should never be done.  That particular bull, where it lived, should not have been shot as a matter of good public relations and decency.

To the others that think his reputation is at stake in the court case.  No, it isn’t.  A very popular animal, open to public view and regularly photographed, safe from any legal hunting pressure, living in wide open alfalfa fields, no longer behaving like a wild elk in or out of elk season was shot with the ease of a killing a heifer by a someone who paid $50k+ for the privilege, observed now by hunters who see the rules as clear as water.  The harm to reputation has nothing to do with the case outcome. Many legal, yet repugnant, things can be done.  If you know that bull has notoriety and is loved in the community and you wiggle around a way to shoot it anyway right on that open field, you are putting a stick right in those people’s eye.  There’s no way around that fact. A call may insulate you from legal penalty, but it can do nothing to protect someone from the public’s judgment.

A satirical description of the hunt:

I drove up on the black top and parked.  A school bus and a mom in her minivan passed by.  Still in the cab, the wily creature was hard to make out as it stood in the thickest cover, the deepest 10 inches of alfalfa this field was choked with.  I put down my road mug of starbucks and the second half of my bear claw on the dash. I pulled up my Swaro 10x50’s, yep, that’s the bull. He was a bit faint, but at 100 yards I was able to pick him out through the thick stuff.  My door closing behind me with a thud I made for the back of the truck.  My buddy Zeb helped and loaded the gun.  My friends and I all wore jeans and flannel shirts so that we would fit in the bull’s natural environment. Just another farmer  over here, no worries mr elk (at least that’s the theory). I could hear traffic and children’s voices in the distance of this wild place.  Next we came up with a plan to get on this beast.  After much debate…. I began to walk straight at him.  One, two, three steps, stopped.  Forgot my hat on the hood of the truck. Darn it!!! I hope this doesn’t spoil the stalk.  I went back for my hat when it occurred to me that I hadn’t finished my danish so I opened the rig and stuffed the 2nd half in my mouth and pulled my hat down tight for the stalk.  My pulse rate was easily 70 now with the anticipation. I pulled up my Swaros again, there he was, now laying down and chewing cud in the gnarly thicket, looking straight at me.  Though he was unable to see me in the extreme farmer break up pattern we’re wearing.  Two, three, four steps.  I’m getting sweaty now and a little nervous so I take a couple minutes to calm down.  Five…. That oughta do it. BANG. Flop.

YEAAAAAAAAAH!!!!!!  WHAHOOO!!!!!  What a hunt, what a great animal…!!   Hi Mrs Johnson, we’ll get it out of the field in just a minute, nice dress you have on, is that paisley?

Doesn't seem most on here agree with this post. They are just fine when another member on here helps kill a yard bull that some called Cupcake and even used bait. It was also a very well known bull. In fact your story you came up with much more resembles that situation than the one we are talking about here.if one shouldn't have been done for public relations and decency, the other one should definitely not have either. But the some on here call Cupcake a trophy, but not the other....

Where you on this hunt?  How do you know what happened?  You question everyone who goes against TR yet you continue to try to muddy the waters about a completely LEGAL hunt. It just reeks of jealousy. Maybe it's because a big payday was missed when another hunter shot the other bull TR was after????


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No I wasn't there but did speak with someone who saw it. Your right it was legal and I don't have a problem with it. I was quoting a post that had commented about shooting a field bull and the trophy factor in that, I was just pointing out how some on here will call one a trophy and not the other.

Where you present when the Bullwinkle Bull was shot?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 07, 2016, 10:17:56 AM
I can see trying to defend a friend, or whatever. But come on...from the outside looking in, this does not look like a simple mistake, an oversight, or anything that could  possibly be legitimized with a phone call.

And compared to the several other websites I have seen this issue addressed, the discussion here has been calm and civilized.
What other sites is this being discussed on. I wanna see other train wrecks

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
Several pages here:
http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/11165637/Re:_Charges_Filed!!!__-_2015_W (http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/11165637/Re:_Charges_Filed!!!__-_2015_W)


In the comments, if you haven't seen this:
http://www.yakimaherald.com/news/local/hunter-facing-charges-after-death-of-beloved-elk-named-bullwinkle/article_844ec8ac-1a65-11e6-8639-53981ae0fc80.html (http://www.yakimaherald.com/news/local/hunter-facing-charges-after-death-of-beloved-elk-named-bullwinkle/article_844ec8ac-1a65-11e6-8639-53981ae0fc80.html)

A bit here; nothing new:
http://www.ifish.net/board/showthread.php?t=1243914 (http://www.ifish.net/board/showthread.php?t=1243914)

Letter to the editor, and comments:
http://www.dailyrecordnews.com/members/letter-as-a-hunter-disgusted-with-killing-of-bullwinkle/article_af72f16e-1e09-11e6-af5a-134c6e038aed.html (http://www.dailyrecordnews.com/members/letter-as-a-hunter-disgusted-with-killing-of-bullwinkle/article_af72f16e-1e09-11e6-af5a-134c6e038aed.html)

Hard to imagine a 'win', regardless of what the court decides.

The 24hourcampfire thread is hilarious! Started by none other than a JDHasty and he made most of the posts in the 5 page tread. Most of the rest of the posts were people bashing JDHasty. Funny thing about the ifish thread, yep JDHasty is there as well.

http://www.huntingpa.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=4099641#Post4099641

Here is yet another one all the way across the country in Pennsylvania,  anyone want to make any bets on who started that one? Yet again it was JDHasty........
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Alchase on June 07, 2016, 10:24:21 AM
kiticaashunter,
Where you present when the Bullwinkle Bull was shot?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on June 07, 2016, 10:27:51 AM
That campfire one is hilarious. :lol4:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 07, 2016, 10:30:11 AM
kiticaashunter,
Where you present when the Bullwinkle Bull was shot?

I have provided more details than anyone else on this issue.  I have said all I can at this point. I hope the others that continue to ask me questions read this and stop asking for things I can't tell them. There will be a point this whole thing is over and the truth will be proven.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Woodchuck on June 07, 2016, 10:32:47 AM
kiticaashunter,
Where you present when the Bullwinkle Bull was shot?

I have provided more details than anyone else on this issue.  I have said all I can at this point. I hope the others that continue to ask me questions read this and stop asking for things I can't tell them. There will be a point this whole thing is over and the truth will be proven.
You can't say whether you were present or not?  :dunno:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: NRA4LIFE on June 07, 2016, 10:36:59 AM
The campfire thread comment about the wife and the cat made me burst out laughing.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: h20hunter on June 07, 2016, 10:38:05 AM
A yes or no would be to factual of a statement.  I would also cause an avalanche of questions going back to the post of claiming to clear things up.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 07, 2016, 10:38:57 AM
kiticaashunter,
Where you present when the Bullwinkle Bull was shot?

I have provided more details than anyone else on this issue.  I have said all I can at this point. I hope the others that continue to ask me questions read this and stop asking for things I can't tell them. There will be a point this whole thing is over and the truth will be proven.
You can't say whether you were present or not?  :dunno:

Respectfully,  please read what I just wrote. I have given all the details I am going to on this issue on a public forum. I'm sorry if that is not up to your satisfaction.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on June 07, 2016, 10:39:39 AM
I can see trying to defend a friend, or whatever. But come on...from the outside looking in, this does not look like a simple mistake, an oversight, or anything that could  possibly be legitimized with a phone call.

And compared to the several other websites I have seen this issue addressed, the discussion here has been calm and civilized.
What other sites is this being discussed on. I wanna see other train wrecks

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
Several pages here:
http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/11165637/Re:_Charges_Filed!!!__-_2015_W (http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/11165637/Re:_Charges_Filed!!!__-_2015_W)


In the comments, if you haven't seen this:
http://www.yakimaherald.com/news/local/hunter-facing-charges-after-death-of-beloved-elk-named-bullwinkle/article_844ec8ac-1a65-11e6-8639-53981ae0fc80.html (http://www.yakimaherald.com/news/local/hunter-facing-charges-after-death-of-beloved-elk-named-bullwinkle/article_844ec8ac-1a65-11e6-8639-53981ae0fc80.html)

A bit here; nothing new:
http://www.ifish.net/board/showthread.php?t=1243914 (http://www.ifish.net/board/showthread.php?t=1243914)

Letter to the editor, and comments:
http://www.dailyrecordnews.com/members/letter-as-a-hunter-disgusted-with-killing-of-bullwinkle/article_af72f16e-1e09-11e6-af5a-134c6e038aed.html (http://www.dailyrecordnews.com/members/letter-as-a-hunter-disgusted-with-killing-of-bullwinkle/article_af72f16e-1e09-11e6-af5a-134c6e038aed.html)

Hard to imagine a 'win', regardless of what the court decides.

The 24hourcampfire thread is hilarious! Started by none other than a JDHasty and he made most of the posts in the 5 page tread. Most of the rest of the posts were people bashing JDHasty. Funny thing about the ifish thread, yep JDHasty is there as well.

http://www.huntingpa.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=4099641#Post4099641

Here is yet another one all the way across the country in Pennsylvania,  anyone want to make any bets on who started that one? Yet again it was JDHasty........
So he is passionate about this case.  :dunno:  I am sure you understand as a new member to this forum, with 49 posts, 48 in this thread and 1 in off topics talking about JD.  Just saying you are pretty focused as well.

I think most on here appreciate the information that each of you have brought to the table.

Should be interesting in the end to see where the chips fall.  I know my opinion has changed multiple times as more information has been provided.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 07, 2016, 10:48:41 AM
A yes or no would be to factual of a statement.  I would also cause an avalanche of questions going back to the post of claiming to clear things up.

I have not said a thing on this issues that was not factual. You will all see that when things go though due process. I have big shoulders and can handle the comments you continue to make towards me, really don't care. I understand the mentality of you witchhunters.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: fishngamereaper on June 07, 2016, 10:49:46 AM
kiticaashunter,
Where you present when the Bullwinkle Bull was shot?

I have provided more details than anyone else on this issue.  I have said all I can at this point. I hope the others that continue to ask me questions read this and stop asking for things I can't tell them. There will be a point this whole thing is over and the truth will be proven.
You can't say whether you were present or not?  :dunno:

Respectfully,  please read what I just wrote. I have given all the details I am going to on this issue on a public forum. I'm sorry if that is not up to your satisfaction.

Guess based on most of your comments you've given the perception that you where one of the crowd. But now you won't awnser a yes or no question. No big deal for me but I think the credibility train just left the station and yours was on it.  But hey, what do I know I wasn't there.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: MountainWalk on June 07, 2016, 10:55:07 AM
This guy talks like an embattled US senator.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: h20hunter on June 07, 2016, 11:00:43 AM
A yes or no would be to factual of a statement.  I would also cause an avalanche of questions going back to the post of claiming to clear things up.

I have not said a thing on this issues that was not factual. You will all see that when things go though due process. I have big shoulders and can handle the comments you continue to make towards me, really don't care. I understand the mentality of you city folks.

You appear to care very much.  You weren't there apparently and are not willing to clear up anything. You have an issue with Jd, all of us, and have not said anything but it will all be clear in the end.

So what's the point of continuing the discussion? We don't have all the facts yet and are speculating about many things. You say you have facts so let's hear 'em! Oh, if you weren't there then don't bother.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on June 07, 2016, 11:03:26 AM
I can see trying to defend a friend, or whatever. But come on...from the outside looking in, this does not look like a simple mistake, an oversight, or anything that could  possibly be legitimized with a phone call.

And compared to the several other websites I have seen this issue addressed, the discussion here has been calm and civilized.
What other sites is this being discussed on. I wanna see other train wrecks

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
Several pages here:
http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/11165637/Re:_Charges_Filed!!!__-_2015_W (http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/11165637/Re:_Charges_Filed!!!__-_2015_W)


In the comments, if you haven't seen this:
http://www.yakimaherald.com/news/local/hunter-facing-charges-after-death-of-beloved-elk-named-bullwinkle/article_844ec8ac-1a65-11e6-8639-53981ae0fc80.html (http://www.yakimaherald.com/news/local/hunter-facing-charges-after-death-of-beloved-elk-named-bullwinkle/article_844ec8ac-1a65-11e6-8639-53981ae0fc80.html)

A bit here; nothing new:
http://www.ifish.net/board/showthread.php?t=1243914 (http://www.ifish.net/board/showthread.php?t=1243914)

Letter to the editor, and comments:
http://www.dailyrecordnews.com/members/letter-as-a-hunter-disgusted-with-killing-of-bullwinkle/article_af72f16e-1e09-11e6-af5a-134c6e038aed.html (http://www.dailyrecordnews.com/members/letter-as-a-hunter-disgusted-with-killing-of-bullwinkle/article_af72f16e-1e09-11e6-af5a-134c6e038aed.html)

Hard to imagine a 'win', regardless of what the court decides.

The 24hourcampfire thread is hilarious! Started by none other than a JDHasty and he made most of the posts in the 5 page tread. Most of the rest of the posts were people bashing JDHasty. Funny thing about the ifish thread, yep JDHasty is there as well.

http://www.huntingpa.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=4099641#Post4099641

Here is yet another one all the way across the country in Pennsylvania,  anyone want to make any bets on who started that one? Yet again it was JDHasty........

So after Cboom (who impresses me as none other than kiticaashunter alter ego) stalked me all over this site for the better part of a month....  After I had left the prior thread alone for north of a couple weeks....  After I had been called out for a second time.... you better believe I responded.

Hope you enjoyed it, you have asked for every bit of what I have posted. 

And as for the Pennsylvania sites, I bought a scope form a woodchuck hunter and he invited me to join a site he and other chuck hunters post on.  They pointed me toward the fact that Todd Reichert of Salkum WA has been the primary subject of a heck of a lot of controversy in their State. They invited me over to the other sites they post on.   I bet TR sure wishes you had let sleeping dogs lie. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 07, 2016, 11:07:08 AM
kiticaashunter,
Where you present when the Bullwinkle Bull was shot?

I have provided more details than anyone else on this issue.  I have said all I can at this point. I hope the others that continue to ask me questions read this and stop asking for things I can't tell them. There will be a point this whole thing is over and the truth will be proven.
You can't say whether you were present or not?  :dunno:

Respectfully,  please read what I just wrote. I have given all the details I am going to on this issue on a public forum. I'm sorry if that is not up to your satisfaction.

Guess based on most of your comments you've given the perception that you where one of the crowd. But now you won't awnser a yes or no question. No big deal for me but I think the credibility train just left the station and yours was on it.  But hey, what do I know I wasn't there.

Want to question my credibility do me a favor and wait until this thing is over. You're going to find everything I have said is 100% true, and many on here were very wrong. I am confident the truth will be heard and justice will be served. Just won't be the result the witchhunters were hoping for.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: grundy53 on June 07, 2016, 11:12:40 AM
kiticaashunter,
Where you present when the Bullwinkle Bull was shot?

I have provided more details than anyone else on this issue.  I have said all I can at this point. I hope the others that continue to ask me questions read this and stop asking for things I can't tell them. There will be a point this whole thing is over and the truth will be proven.
You can't say whether you were present or not?  :dunno:



No I wasn't there but did speak with someone who saw it. Your right it was legal and I don't have a problem with it. I was quoting a post that had commented about shooting a field bull and the trophy factor in that, I was just pointing out how some on here will call one a trophy and not the other.

In his own words. He wasn't there. He just wants people to assume he knows what he is talking about. Even though he at best is working with second hand information. Information that may be naturally biased seeing as how it was provided by the subject/subjects in question.

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 07, 2016, 11:13:15 AM
A yes or no would be to factual of a statement.  I would also cause an avalanche of questions going back to the post of claiming to clear things up.

I have not said a thing on this issues that was not factual. You will all see that when things go though due process. I have big shoulders and can handle the comments you continue to make towards me, really don't care. I understand the mentality of you city folks.

You appear to care very much.  You weren't there apparently and are not willing to clear up anything. You have an issue with Jd, all of us, and have not said anything but it will all be clear in the end.

So what's the point of continuing the discussion? We don't have all the facts yet and are speculating about many things. You say you have facts so let's hear 'em! Oh, if you weren't there then don't bother.


I provided you the facts of exactly who from the Wdfw gave the all clear to shoot the bull on the phone.  I have given details on what was discussed. I even told you exactly how many minutes transpired between the two calls. There has been zero speculation on my part, but alot of it on the part of you witchhunters.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 07, 2016, 11:22:28 AM
I can see trying to defend a friend, or whatever. But come on...from the outside looking in, this does not look like a simple mistake, an oversight, or anything that could  possibly be legitimized with a phone call.

And compared to the several other websites I have seen this issue addressed, the discussion here has been calm and civilized.
What other sites is this being discussed on. I wanna see other train wrecks

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
Several pages here:
http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/11165637/Re:_Charges_Filed!!!__-_2015_W (http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/11165637/Re:_Charges_Filed!!!__-_2015_W)


In the comments, if you haven't seen this:
http://www.yakimaherald.com/news/local/hunter-facing-charges-after-death-of-beloved-elk-named-bullwinkle/article_844ec8ac-1a65-11e6-8639-53981ae0fc80.html (http://www.yakimaherald.com/news/local/hunter-facing-charges-after-death-of-beloved-elk-named-bullwinkle/article_844ec8ac-1a65-11e6-8639-53981ae0fc80.html)

A bit here; nothing new:
http://www.ifish.net/board/showthread.php?t=1243914 (http://www.ifish.net/board/showthread.php?t=1243914)

Letter to the editor, and comments:
http://www.dailyrecordnews.com/members/letter-as-a-hunter-disgusted-with-killing-of-bullwinkle/article_af72f16e-1e09-11e6-af5a-134c6e038aed.html (http://www.dailyrecordnews.com/members/letter-as-a-hunter-disgusted-with-killing-of-bullwinkle/article_af72f16e-1e09-11e6-af5a-134c6e038aed.html)

Hard to imagine a 'win', regardless of what the court decides.

The 24hourcampfire thread is hilarious! Started by none other than a JDHasty and he made most of the posts in the 5 page tread. Most of the rest of the posts were people bashing JDHasty. Funny thing about the ifish thread, yep JDHasty is there as well.

http://www.huntingpa.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=4099641#Post4099641

Here is yet another one all the way across the country in Pennsylvania,  anyone want to make any bets on who started that one? Yet again it was JDHasty........

So after Cboom (who impresses me as none other than kiticaashunter alter ego) stalked me all over this site for the better part of a month....  After I had left the prior thread alone for north of a couple weeks....  After I had been called out for a second time.... you better believe I responded.

Hope you enjoyed it, you have asked for every bit of what I have posted. 

And as for the Pennsylvania sites, I bought a scope form a woodchuck hunter and he invited me to join a site he and other chuck hunters post on.  They pointed me toward the fact that Todd Reichert of Salkum WA has been the primary subject of a heck of a lot of controversy in their State. They invited me over to the other sites they post on.   I bet TR sure wishes you had let sleeping dogs lie.

Sorry to disappoint you but no alter egos here. You sure seem to put yourself out there as a guy that doesn't like to see the rules broken. I have an honest question,  have you ever been sited for breaking any game laws?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 07, 2016, 11:24:49 AM
kiticaashunter,
Where you present when the Bullwinkle Bull was shot?

I have provided more details than anyone else on this issue.  I have said all I can at this point. I hope the others that continue to ask me questions read this and stop asking for things I can't tell them. There will be a point this whole thing is over and the truth will be proven.
You can't say whether you were present or not?  :dunno:



No I wasn't there but did speak with someone who saw it. Your right it was legal and I don't have a problem with it. I was quoting a post that had commented about shooting a field bull and the trophy factor in that, I was just pointing out how some on here will call one a trophy and not the other.

In his own words. He wasn't there. He just wants people to assume he knows what he is talking about. Even though he at best is working with second hand information. Information that may be naturally biased seeing as how it was provided by the subject/subjects in question.

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk

Might think about working on your reading comprehension.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: grundy53 on June 07, 2016, 11:30:34 AM
kiticaashunter,
Where you present when the Bullwinkle Bull was shot?

I have provided more details than anyone else on this issue.  I have said all I can at this point. I hope the others that continue to ask me questions read this and stop asking for things I can't tell them. There will be a point this whole thing is over and the truth will be proven.
You can't say whether you were present or not?  :dunno:



No I wasn't there but did speak with someone who saw it. Your right it was legal and I don't have a problem with it. I was quoting a post that had commented about shooting a field bull and the trophy factor in that, I was just pointing out how some on here will call one a trophy and not the other.

In his own words. He wasn't there. He just wants people to assume he knows what he is talking about. Even though he at best is working with second hand information. Information that may be naturally biased seeing as how it was provided by the subject/subjects in question.

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk

Might think about working on your reading comprehension.
You're right. I guess you spend so much time try to deflect attention for the illegal hunt by talking about the legal hunt that I got them confused. Although I'm betting you probably don't have first hand information on the closed unit hunt either.

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: WAPatriot on June 07, 2016, 11:31:01 AM
Anyone who doesn't give hunters the benefit of the doubt is an anti hunter and doesn't belong on a hunting website they should join peta or glow.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: grundy53 on June 07, 2016, 11:33:31 AM
Anyone who doesn't give hunters the benefit of the doubt is an anti hunter and doesn't belong on a hunting website they should join peta or glow.

 :tup:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on June 07, 2016, 11:33:50 AM
I can see trying to defend a friend, or whatever. But come on...from the outside looking in, this does not look like a simple mistake, an oversight, or anything that could  possibly be legitimized with a phone call.

And compared to the several other websites I have seen this issue addressed, the discussion here has been calm and civilized.
What other sites is this being discussed on. I wanna see other train wrecks

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
Several pages here:
http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/11165637/Re:_Charges_Filed!!!__-_2015_W (http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/11165637/Re:_Charges_Filed!!!__-_2015_W)


In the comments, if you haven't seen this:
http://www.yakimaherald.com/news/local/hunter-facing-charges-after-death-of-beloved-elk-named-bullwinkle/article_844ec8ac-1a65-11e6-8639-53981ae0fc80.html (http://www.yakimaherald.com/news/local/hunter-facing-charges-after-death-of-beloved-elk-named-bullwinkle/article_844ec8ac-1a65-11e6-8639-53981ae0fc80.html)

A bit here; nothing new:
http://www.ifish.net/board/showthread.php?t=1243914 (http://www.ifish.net/board/showthread.php?t=1243914)

Letter to the editor, and comments:
http://www.dailyrecordnews.com/members/letter-as-a-hunter-disgusted-with-killing-of-bullwinkle/article_af72f16e-1e09-11e6-af5a-134c6e038aed.html (http://www.dailyrecordnews.com/members/letter-as-a-hunter-disgusted-with-killing-of-bullwinkle/article_af72f16e-1e09-11e6-af5a-134c6e038aed.html)

Hard to imagine a 'win', regardless of what the court decides.

The 24hourcampfire thread is hilarious! Started by none other than a JDHasty and he made most of the posts in the 5 page tread. Most of the rest of the posts were people bashing JDHasty. Funny thing about the ifish thread, yep JDHasty is there as well.

http://www.huntingpa.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=4099641#Post4099641

Here is yet another one all the way across the country in Pennsylvania,  anyone want to make any bets on who started that one? Yet again it was JDHasty........
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: NOCK NOCK on June 07, 2016, 11:40:42 AM
Seems the common thought train is, "Wait until the court has done it's process before passing judgment"

Well how effective/just is the court system? Is it always 100% correct? OJ along with many others know that the court is not always right. Plenty of folks have gotten away with crimes because they had a good lawyer that found a way to twist the system in his clients favor. ...."He had a big name lawyer that got him off on a technicality" (from a Hank Jr. song  :chuckle:)
So the court lets TR walk....... does that mean he did not do something illegal?.....NOPE

Whatever the final outcome is from the courts, will have zero effect on my beliefs of what went down.
Not guilty=He got away with it.
Guilty= "Justice is served"  :dunno:  BUT, has or will he learn a lesson from it?......Again I would guess NOPE

Like was mentioned early on in one of these threads................  Play stupid games = Win stupid prizes

Flame away
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: NOCK NOCK on June 07, 2016, 11:43:08 AM
If I had the gov tag, or raffle tag, I'd think I could hunt in said units, but hey, I'm just a big dumb lewis county boy, not neatly as savvy as the city slickers up north....thank God for the pierce and king county folks...

Do you read the regs?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: NOCK NOCK on June 07, 2016, 11:44:45 AM


Here is a scenario,  Speed limit is 60mph from point A to point B, (point B is their destination)

1. A person drives their car from A to B @ 80mph. Did they break the law? Was this action illegal or legal?

2. A person drives their car from A to B @ 80mph. Before arriving at their destination, a cop pulls them over and cites them with a speeding infraction. Did they break the law???  Again, illegal or legal???

This is why I believe most on here are furious with the happenings of this killing.

1. Of course speeding is illegal, just because you got away with it....does not make it the right thing to do.
2. Of course they broke law by speeding.

What about person C who calls an officer before leaving on his trip and asks if it is okay to drive 80 from point A to B?  And the officer says go ahead?

And the officer was told he was on speaker phone when the conversation started and was told there were several people there listening to what he said........

 This comment is very interesting. If true, sounds like witnesses were wanted in case they got the answer they were looking for even if it was wrong. Why else would you need witnesses to a phone call about a question of the regs. I think most people that would make a phone call to try to clarify something WDFW would just make the call and then tell their buddies. "Yep, they said it was ok." Or "they said no, let go find another one." or something of the sort. Obviously some planning went into this one.


+!

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: idahohuntr on June 07, 2016, 11:52:02 AM
I provided you the facts of exactly who from the Wdfw gave the all clear to shoot the bull on the phone.  I have given details on what was discussed.
Really?  You actually have no facts or details regarding the "permission call".  You state that Mr. Grant "checked into it" and vaguely reference (as in no details of who participated, what was asked, why there was so much confusion) some other call where "permission" was granted.  Did Mr. Grant specifically tell you it was legal to kill that bull and to go ahead and shoot it? The very vague "another call was made" leaves a lot of doubt about the validity of your claim that WDFW granted permission...which fits the narrative of why a County prosecutor would file criminal charges...its all bogus.  So by all means, clear this up and tell us who specifically authorized/gave permission/confirmed it was legal to kill a branch antlered bull in GMU 334 with the Raffle tag?
I signed up to this forum to hopefully clear things up some. There has been a lot of false information posted on this site. A call was made to the game department asking if it was ok to shoot the bull where it located. After Morgan Grant from the game department checked into it another phone conversation took place and the hunters were told they absolutely could harvest that bull with that tag at that location. If in fact the info given was wrong the game department is the one to be blamed.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 07, 2016, 11:55:44 AM
If I had the gov tag, or raffle tag, I'd think I could hunt in said units, but hey, I'm just a big dumb lewis county boy, not neatly as savvy as the city slickers up north....thank God for the pierce and king county folks...

Do you read the regs?
I would assume most read the regs. Contrary to what some of you geniuses think they can be confusing. If they were as simple as some of you imply you would think the local game warden and regional comander would not have come to the conclusion it was legal after researching  it himself?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on June 07, 2016, 12:00:29 PM
Was this hunt done on some kind of special tag, or just over the counter?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 07, 2016, 12:01:23 PM
I provided you the facts of exactly who from the Wdfw gave the all clear to shoot the bull on the phone.  I have given details on what was discussed.
Really?  You actually have no facts or details regarding the "permission call".  You state that Mr. Grant "checked into it" and vaguely reference (as in no details of who participated, what was asked, why there was so much confusion) some other call where "permission" was granted.  Did Mr. Grant specifically tell you it was legal to kill that bull and to go ahead and shoot it? The very vague "another call was made" leaves a lot of doubt about the validity of your claim that WDFW granted permission...which fits the narrative of why a County prosecutor would file criminal charges...its all bogus.  So by all means, clear this up and tell us who specifically authorized/gave permission/confirmed it was legal to kill a branch antlered bull in GMU 334 with the Raffle tag?
I signed up to this forum to hopefully clear things up some. There has been a lot of false information posted on this site. A call was made to the game department asking if it was ok to shoot the bull where it located. After Morgan Grant from the game department checked into it another phone conversation took place and the hunters were told they absolutely could harvest that bull with that tag at that location. If in fact the info given was wrong the game department is the one to be blamed.

Morgan Grant did.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on June 07, 2016, 12:02:05 PM
Was this hunt done on some kind of special tag, or just over the counter?

 :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Woodchuck on June 07, 2016, 12:16:50 PM
Was this hunt done on some kind of special tag, or just over the counter?
Do you mean the kitchen counter?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bobcat on June 07, 2016, 12:21:59 PM
Approximately $16,000 invested in raffle tickets and he drew the South Central raffle, which includes a deer tag, an elk tag, and a bighorn sheep tag.

He also had the auction elk tag which was around $50,000.

He chose to use the raffle tag on the domesticated, large bull elk that he killed in an Ellenburg farmer's back yard. (And yes, in a unit for which neither elk tag was valid)

Does that answer your question, Dan-o?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: pianoman9701 on June 07, 2016, 01:01:54 PM
If I had the gov tag, or raffle tag, I'd think I could hunt in said units, but hey, I'm just a big dumb lewis county boy, not neatly as savvy as the city slickers up north....thank God for the pierce and king county folks...

Do you read the regs?
I would assume most read the regs. Contrary to what some of you geniuses think they can be confusing. If they were as simple as some of you imply you would think the local game warden and regional comander would not have come to the conclusion it was legal after researching  it himself?

So, what you're saying is that a guy who spent probably $100K in total to shoot an elk made a mistake reading the regs. Before you said he had called because he knew the restrictions in that unit and received permission from Mr. Grant to shoot the elk anyway. Which is it? And, if he didn't know it was illegal, why would he have called Mr. Grant at all?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 07, 2016, 01:10:22 PM
If I had the gov tag, or raffle tag, I'd think I could hunt in said units, but hey, I'm just a big dumb lewis county boy, not neatly as savvy as the city slickers up north....thank God for the pierce and king county folks...

Do you read the regs?
I would assume most read the regs. Contrary to what some of you geniuses think they can be confusing. If they were as simple as some of you imply you would think the local game warden and regional comander would not have come to the conclusion it was legal after researching  it himself?

So, what you're saying is that a guy who spent probably $100K in total to shoot an elk made a mistake reading the regs. Before you said he had called because he knew the restrictions in that unit and received permission from Mr. Grant to shoot the elk anyway. Which is it? And, if he didn't know it was illegal, why would he have called Mr. Grant at all?

And this is how the truth gets twisted. Before I said he knew the restrictions on firearms in that area. And no I am not saying he made a mistake reading the regs. I am saying the call was made to find out the legality for weapons and the unit. A crystal clear answer was given on both notes.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on June 07, 2016, 01:28:46 PM
Is this the same bull that was shot outside Ellensburg?

If so, I heard that there were several bulls hanging out together in a field.

I think people even got pictures of the bulls.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bob33 on June 07, 2016, 01:31:15 PM
Is this the same bull that was shot outside Ellensburg?

If so, I heard that there were several bulls hanging out together in a field.

I think people even got pictures of the bulls.
It's probably not been disclosed yet but the bull was shot in a field owned by a Seahawk strong safety. That information will come out later.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: pianoman9701 on June 07, 2016, 01:32:57 PM
If I had the gov tag, or raffle tag, I'd think I could hunt in said units, but hey, I'm just a big dumb lewis county boy, not neatly as savvy as the city slickers up north....thank God for the pierce and king county folks...

Do you read the regs?
I would assume most read the regs. Contrary to what some of you geniuses think they can be confusing. If they were as simple as some of you imply you would think the local game warden and regional comander would not have come to the conclusion it was legal after researching  it himself?

So, what you're saying is that a guy who spent probably $100K in total to shoot an elk made a mistake reading the regs. Before you said he had called because he knew the restrictions in that unit and received permission from Mr. Grant to shoot the elk anyway. Which is it? And, if he didn't know it was illegal, why would he have called Mr. Grant at all?

And this is how the truth gets twisted. Before I said he knew the restrictions on firearms in that area. And no I am not saying he made a mistake reading the regs. I am saying the call was made to find out the legality for weapons and the unit. A crystal clear answer was given on both notes.

So, the regulations are so confusing that WDFW enforcement couldn't figure them out. Well then, you should have no trouble with the court system. Best of luck!  :tup:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: DaveMonti on June 07, 2016, 01:46:18 PM
Is this the same bull that was shot outside Ellensburg?

If so, I heard that there were several bulls hanging out together in a field.

I think people even got pictures of the bulls.

I heard people were feeding the bulls (all 4 of them) by hand.  Someone said a gorilla shot one and it got everyone's knickers in a knot. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on June 07, 2016, 02:09:45 PM
If I had the gov tag, or raffle tag, I'd think I could hunt in said units, but hey, I'm just a big dumb lewis county boy, not neatly as savvy as the city slickers up north....thank God for the pierce and king county folks...

Do you read the regs?
I would assume most read the regs. Contrary to what some of you geniuses think they can be confusing. If they were as simple as some of you imply you would think the local game warden and regional comander would not have come to the conclusion it was legal after researching  it himself?

So, what you're saying is that a guy who spent probably $100K in total to shoot an elk made a mistake reading the regs. Before you said he had called because he knew the restrictions in that unit and received permission from Mr. Grant to shoot the elk anyway. Which is it? And, if he didn't know it was illegal, why would he have called Mr. Grant at all?
I am saying the call was made to find out the legality for weapons and the unit. A crystal clear answer was given on both notes.

 Seems the pertinent question would have been to ask if he could kill a branched antler bull in unit 334 with his tag.........but then that would have closed any loopholes right! :dunno:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: teanawayslayer on June 07, 2016, 02:42:59 PM
Kiti was the bull killed the same day as the supposed phone call?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 07, 2016, 03:11:08 PM
If I had the gov tag, or raffle tag, I'd think I could hunt in said units, but hey, I'm just a big dumb lewis county boy, not neatly as savvy as the city slickers up north....thank God for the pierce and king county folks...

Do you read the regs?
I would assume most read the regs. Contrary to what some of you geniuses think they can be confusing. If they were as simple as some of you imply you would think the local game warden and regional comander would not have come to the conclusion it was legal after researching  it himself?

So, what you're saying is that a guy who spent probably $100K in total to shoot an elk made a mistake reading the regs. Before you said he had called because he knew the restrictions in that unit and received permission from Mr. Grant to shoot the elk anyway. Which is it? And, if he didn't know it was illegal, why would he have called Mr. Grant at all?
I am saying the call was made to find out the legality for weapons and the unit. A crystal clear answer was given on both notes.

 Seems the pertinent question would have been to ask if he could kill a branched antler bull in unit 334 with his tag.........but then that would have closed any loopholes right! :dunno:

Maybe I should have been more clear. That was part of what was talked about. First was the legality of weapons,  second was what was legal with that tag. Nobody was looking for a loophole, just clarification on what was legal. I get you will never accept that,  the truth.  I'm betting the court will if it ever actually gets that far.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 07, 2016, 03:18:44 PM
Kiti was the bull killed the same day as the supposed phone call?

Why are you asking questions you know the answer to?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on June 07, 2016, 03:20:08 PM
If he's found guilty I'm positive the masses will say "slap on the wrist". If he's exonerated it's because he bought his way out. Either way nobody's going to be happy.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: teanawayslayer on June 07, 2016, 03:21:20 PM
Kiti was the bull killed the same day as the supposed phone call?

Why are you asking questions you know the answer to?
just a question. I wasn't there how would I know. I thought you were here to clear things up.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on June 07, 2016, 03:27:59 PM
If I had the gov tag, or raffle tag, I'd think I could hunt in said units, but hey, I'm just a big dumb lewis county boy, not neatly as savvy as the city slickers up north....thank God for the pierce and king county folks...

Do you read the regs?
I would assume most read the regs. Contrary to what some of you geniuses think they can be confusing. If they were as simple as some of you imply you would think the local game warden and regional comander would not have come to the conclusion it was legal after researching  it himself?

So, what you're saying is that a guy who spent probably $100K in total to shoot an elk made a mistake reading the regs. Before you said he had called because he knew the restrictions in that unit and received permission from Mr. Grant to shoot the elk anyway. Which is it? And, if he didn't know it was illegal, why would he have called Mr. Grant at all?
I am saying the call was made to find out the legality for weapons and the unit. A crystal clear answer was given on both notes.

 Seems the pertinent question would have been to ask if he could kill a branched antler bull in unit 334 with his tag.........but then that would have closed any loopholes right! :dunno:
  second was what was legal with that tag.
This is still vague and leaving wiggle room.

 Are you stating that Mr Grant was asked directly if a branched antler bull could be killed with that tag in unit 334, yes or no?

 And he gave authorization to kill a branched antler bull in 334, yes or no?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on June 07, 2016, 03:35:38 PM
If I had the gov tag, or raffle tag, I'd think I could hunt in said units, but hey, I'm just a big dumb lewis county boy, not neatly as savvy as the city slickers up north....thank God for the pierce and king county folks...

Do you read the regs?
I would assume most read the regs. Contrary to what some of you geniuses think they can be confusing. If they were as simple as some of you imply you would think the local game warden and regional comander would not have come to the conclusion it was legal after researching  it himself?

So, what you're saying is that a guy who spent probably $100K in total to shoot an elk made a mistake reading the regs. Before you said he had called because he knew the restrictions in that unit and received permission from Mr. Grant to shoot the elk anyway. Which is it? And, if he didn't know it was illegal, why would he have called Mr. Grant at all?
I am saying the call was made to find out the legality for weapons and the unit. A crystal clear answer was given on both notes.

 Seems the pertinent question would have been to ask if he could kill a branched antler bull in unit 334 with his tag.........but then that would have closed any loopholes right! :dunno:
I get you will never accept that,  the truth.

 I think you have me confused with someone else, all I've done is state that the regs clearly show that it was illegal to kill a branched antler bull in unit 334.

 If Mr Grant gave authority to kill that bull, then I'd like to know what/who gives him that authority, and if he authorized that without legal authority to do so, then he should lose his job.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: DaveMonti on June 07, 2016, 04:05:20 PM
If he's found guilty I'm positive the masses will say "slap on the wrist". If he's exonerated it's because he bought his way out. Either way nobody's going to be happy.

I know one thing.  It will be years before this is cleared up.  His plea for the 2007 incident was when, 2012?  I hope nobody is holding their breath for a conclusion to this one. 

Just think, we have until about 2019 to thrash this over and over and over and over....then the post trial/plea commentary! 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Buckmark on June 07, 2016, 04:09:58 PM
If he's found guilty I'm positive the masses will say "slap on the wrist". If he's exonerated it's because he bought his way out. Either way nobody's going to be happy.

I know one thing.  It will be years before this is cleared up.  His plea for the 2007 incident was when, 2012?  I hope nobody is holding their breath for a conclusion to this one. 

Just think, we have until about 2019 to thrash this over and over and over and over....then the post trial/plea commentary!
So basically this thread has the potential to surpass the Bigfoot thread  :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: DaveMonti on June 07, 2016, 04:13:06 PM
I think the whopping 3 participants on the Bigfoot thread will disagree with you.  Then they will sully your name for speaking so negatively about the Bigfoot thread being overcome. 
I think if you combine all the threads on this topic, it has already surpassed the BF thread.  I'm sure there is a contract out on me right now for saying this.

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on June 07, 2016, 04:13:37 PM
If he's found guilty I'm positive the masses will say "slap on the wrist". If he's exonerated it's because he bought his way out. Either way nobody's going to be happy.

I know one thing.  It will be years before this is cleared up.  His plea for the 2007 incident was when, 2012?  I hope nobody is holding their breath for a conclusion to this one. 

Just think, we have until about 2019 to thrash this over and over and over and over....then the post trial/plea commentary!
So basically this thread has the potential to surpass the Bigfoot thread  :chuckle:

Blasphemy, outrageous,  NEVER!!! >:( >:( >:(
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: DaveMonti on June 07, 2016, 04:14:03 PM
I told you so!!!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on June 07, 2016, 04:15:06 PM
I told you so!!!

3?! There's close to 10, get it right. We all pop in at different times and some have more time then others.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Buckmark on June 07, 2016, 04:15:46 PM
Only 11420 posts to go  :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: snake on June 07, 2016, 04:17:24 PM
The money does not go to conservation.  Sorry to break your hearts.  Just for fun, find a law you consider confusing, call 2 or 3 wdfw offices and ask them for an answer.  I guarantee  you will get more than one answer.  I have done it many times.  Sometimes they even tell me it depends on the game wardens interpretation of the rule whether you will get a ticket or not."

Are you sure the money doesn't go to conservation?
Yes I am sure. Do you need Documentation?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Troutdreamer on June 07, 2016, 04:29:14 PM
The money does not go to conservation.  Sorry to break your hearts.  Just for fun, find a law you consider confusing, call 2 or 3 wdfw offices and ask them for an answer.  I guarantee  you will get more than one answer.  I have done it many times.  Sometimes they even tell me it depends on the game wardens interpretation of the rule whether you will get a ticket or not."

Are you sure the money doesn't go to conservation?
Yes I am sure. Do you need Documentation?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on June 07, 2016, 04:39:27 PM
Looks like it goes to conservation to me.....  :dunno:

Thanks Troutdreamer.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Ghost Hunter on June 07, 2016, 05:06:25 PM
If he's found guilty I'm positive the masses will say "slap on the wrist". If he's exonerated it's because he bought his way out. Either way nobody's going to be happy.

I know one thing.  It will be years before this is cleared up.  His plea for the 2007 incident was when, 2012?  I hope nobody is holding their breath for a conclusion to this one. 

Just think, we have until about 2019 to thrash this over and over and over and over....then the post trial/plea commentary!
So basically this thread has the potential to surpass the Bigfoot thread  :chuckle:

Blasphemy, outrageous,  NEVER!!! >:( >:( >:(
   The last couple days seems the BF &TR thread have morphed into one  :dunno: :chuckle: :peep:  :sry:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on June 07, 2016, 05:36:13 PM
No way......

This pitiful thread needs another 450 pages to reach epic Big Foot status.


I'll help......

So it sounds like this bull was shot legally, huh?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on June 07, 2016, 05:36:27 PM
I think the whopping 3 participants on the Bigfoot thread will disagree with you.  Then they will sully your name for speaking so negatively about the Bigfoot thread being overcome. 
I think if you combine all the threads on this topic, it has already surpassed the BF thread.  I'm sure there is a contract out on me right now for saying this.

The BIGGIES will be hot on your six now, see glad I don't have that heat on me!  :yike:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on June 07, 2016, 05:39:52 PM
No way......

This pitiful thread needs another 450 pages to reach epic Big Foot status.


I'll help......

So it sounds like this bull was shot legally, huh?


Dan-o I think you just need to worry about the last place you misplaced your biggie research CAMERAS buddy old pal, so get back to some SERIOUS research and leave this nonsense thread alone. JDHASTY has this thread FORAC!  >:( >:( >:(
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on June 07, 2016, 05:41:32 PM
Ok now where were we, the bullwinkle bull was shot legally huh.  :dunno:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: DaveMonti on June 07, 2016, 07:07:22 PM
My comments about everything on this board have been horribly misconstrued by the media, just like Trump. 
Now that I've cleared that up, all is well again.  Continue with the discussion if you will.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: snake on June 07, 2016, 07:36:32 PM
The money does not go to conservation.  Sorry to break your hearts.  Just for fun, find a law you consider confusing, call 2 or 3 wdfw offices and ask them for an answer.  I guarantee  you will get more than one answer.  I have done it many times.  Sometimes they even tell me it depends on the game wardens interpretation of the rule whether you will get a ticket or not."

Are you sure the money doesn't go to conservation?
LOL!!! WOW! WDFW Told me so!! excellent.  Now they have more money to catch people without discovery passes.  The more money we give, the more the deer and elk will reproduce! Thank you for being a good little sheep in the flock and pointing that out for us.
Yes I am sure. Do you need Documentation?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: M_ray on June 07, 2016, 08:06:06 PM
kiticaashunter,
Where you present when the Bullwinkle Bull was shot?

I have provided more details than anyone else on this issue.  I have said all I can at this point. I hope the others that continue to ask me questions read this and stop asking for things I can't tell them. There will be a point this whole thing is over and the truth will be proven.

You've done nothing of the sort  :dunno:  The only thing you provided different was your claim of 2 phone calls to Grant. Otherwise the rest is all fluff and a poor attempt to deflect the real questions. It's like trying to talk with my x-wife  :bash:

You say you weren't there so why would you say you have said all you can at this point? And stop asking for things you cant tell them? If you really want to clear things up like you claimed you would answer questions directly.  ;)
 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: NOCK NOCK on June 07, 2016, 08:12:58 PM
Here is something to chew on.....
Several posts have been made stating that as hunters, we all need to support, stand up for, or give the benefit of the doubt to other hunters.
Like this one. (not trying to pick on you WApatriot, yours was easiest to find. Bearpaw has said it too)

Anyone who doesn't give hunters the benefit of the doubt is an anti hunter and doesn't belong on a hunting website they should join peta or glow.


I would normally agree with this statement(not WApatriots, the general one above the quote), but when it comes to this elk deal, I have to respectfully disagree and draw the line here.
As a group(hunters) we can not/should not, support very questionable behavior like this Bullwinkle mess.

Hunters as a group have discouraged the practice of displaying their kills on top of their vehicles for all to see. Why? Because it makes ALL hunters look bad to the public and anti-hunting crowd.
We have discouraged; the shooting of a sow with cubs, shooting of fawns & calfs, bloody messy kill photos, shooting ducks on the water, shooting turkeys on the roost, gut piles on the side of the road, extra long shots at animals(esp. archery), etc.
Again why are these things discouraged and looked down upon from our own group? They are all perfectly legal.
Why???? Because they are unethical, unsportsman like, and make ALL hunters look bad.

So why should the actions of the Bullwinkle crew be any different?

Irregardless of whether or not permission to shoot was granted, it should have never happened. As JD has said multiple times, How could TR's group of "hunters" ever think this would end well?  Shooting a tame, well known & photographed bull elk that lived in a farmers field was a very dumb thing to do.

I personally can not support, or give the benefit of the doubt, to ANYONE who would do such a thing and call it hunting.  Nothing but greed working on this "Hunt"
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on June 07, 2016, 08:18:21 PM
Here is something to chew on.....
Several posts have been made stating that as hunters, we all need to support, stand up for, or give the benefit of the doubt to other hunters.
Like this one. (not trying to pick on you WApatriot, yours was easiest to find. Bearpaw has said it too)

Anyone who doesn't give hunters the benefit of the doubt is an anti hunter and doesn't belong on a hunting website they should join peta or glow.


I would normally agree with this statement, but when it comes to this elk deal, I have to respectfully disagree and draw the line here.
As a group(hunters) we can not/should not, support very questionable behavior like this Bullwinkle mess.

Hunters as a group have discouraged the practice of displaying their kills on top of their vehicles for all to see. Why? Because it makes ALL hunters look bad to the public and anti-hunting crowd.
We have discouraged; the shooting of a sow with cubs, shooting of fawns & calfs, bloody messy kill photos, shooting ducks on the water, shooting turkeys on the roost, gut piles on the side of the road, extra long shots at animals(esp. archery), etc.
Again why are these things discouraged and looked down upon from our own group? They are all perfectly legal.
Why???? Because they are unethical, unsportsman like, and make ALL hunters look bad.

So why should the actions of the Bullwinkle crew be any different?

Irregardless of whether or not permission to shoot was granted, it should have never happened. As JD has said multiple times, How could TR's group of "hunters" ever think this would end well?  Shooting a tame, well known & photographed bull elk that lived in a farmers field was a very dumb thing to do.

I personally can not support, or give the benefit of the doubt, to ANYONE who would do such a thing and call it hunting.  Nothing but greed working on this "Hunt"

Here, here best post yet! It even beat my sheep milk lips post,  and all the biggie bleed over posts. :tup:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: fishngamereaper on June 07, 2016, 08:20:56 PM
Well said knock.... Couldn't agree more.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on June 07, 2016, 08:44:05 PM
Is this the same bull that was shot outside Ellensburg?

If so, I heard that there were several bulls hanging out together in a field.

I think people even got pictures of the bulls.
It's probably not been disclosed yet but the bull was shot in a field owned by a Seahawk strong safety. That information will come out later.

I KNEW IT!!!!!!!

He sucks even more now!!!!!!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 07, 2016, 08:51:53 PM
Take field fed bull elk are killed quite often and posted on web sites such as this as trophys every fall. Better run those guys into the ground. Get to work guys
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Troutdreamer on June 07, 2016, 08:55:38 PM
The money does not go to conservation.  Sorry to break your hearts.  Just for fun, find a law you consider confusing, call 2 or 3 wdfw offices and ask them for an answer.  I guarantee  you will get more than one answer.  I have done it many times.  Sometimes they even tell me it depends on the game wardens interpretation of the rule whether you will get a ticket or not."

Are you sure the money doesn't go to conservation?
LOL!!! WOW! WDFW Told me so!! excellent.  Now they have more money to catch people without discovery passes.  The more money we give, the more the deer and elk will reproduce! Thank you for being a good little sheep in the flock and pointing that out for us.
Yes I am sure. Do you need Documentation?

Lol, so if you are so sure....where is the documentation you promised?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on June 07, 2016, 08:58:21 PM
The money does not go to conservation.  Sorry to break your hearts.  Just for fun, find a law you consider confusing, call 2 or 3 wdfw offices and ask them for an answer.  I guarantee  you will get more than one answer.  I have done it many times.  Sometimes they even tell me it depends on the game wardens interpretation of the rule whether you will get a ticket or not."

Are you sure the money doesn't go to conservation?
LOL!!! WOW! WDFW Told me so!! excellent.  Now they have more money to catch people without discovery passes.  The more money we give, the more the deer and elk will reproduce! Thank you for being a good little sheep in the flock and pointing that out for us.
Yes I am sure. Do you need Documentation?

Lol, so if you are so sure....where is the documentation you promised?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You already proved it with documentation, Troutdreamer, but I bet he won't admit that you are right......
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JimmyHoffa on June 07, 2016, 09:39:50 PM
If he's found guilty I'm positive the masses will say "slap on the wrist". If he's exonerated it's because he bought his way out. Either way nobody's going to be happy.
It got investigated and actually looked at by a prosecutor.  I think most are happy it got that far. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: popeshawnpaul on June 07, 2016, 09:57:34 PM
District court cases rarely go beyond a year from start to finish.  3-6 months is standard.   His other case was federal and they drag out years.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on June 07, 2016, 10:26:52 PM
So is it a Federal offense to shoot an elk south of the canal?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on June 07, 2016, 10:33:55 PM
So is it a Federal offense to shoot an elk south of the canal?

Uhhhhhummmm CAMERAS! >:( >:( >:(

But since we're on the subject, I think it would only apply if he crossed state canal lines, RICO.  :dunno:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Branden on June 07, 2016, 10:46:31 PM
I agree with popes post a few pages back. I know one of the guys that is saying TR is guilty and should get the book thrown at him broke the law if scouting for game from a plane is illegal. Yet he is acting holier then thou in this thread. I would bet others have broke the law also in this thread.

Then you have a guy in this thread posting pics I highly doubt he has permission to post. Yet in other threads when it's his buddies pics that get posted he spouts off about how people should respect other people and not post pics if they aren't yours.

I believe both of those are the definition of hypocrisy.

Maybe TR knew the unit was closed and called to ask why? Maybe the game department said he could kill a bull there. If I got the ok to kill something in the Water Shed from the game department I would if there was something in there I wanted to kill.

What's the rule in Washington about picking up dead heads? Against the law correct? I know a guy that has picked up two big bulls that the game department said he could. So what's the difference between that, and shooting a bull in a closed unit if the game department actually did give permission?

I don't really care if TR is found guilty or not. Him shooting a bull there saves a bull in a unit I might actually get to hunt.  But the hypocrisy in this thread is pretty bad. Carry on though and keep acting like angels.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Odell on June 08, 2016, 05:40:17 AM
I agree with popes post a few pages back. I know one of the guys that is saying TR is guilty and should get the book thrown at him broke the law if scouting for game from a plane is illegal. Yet he is acting holier then thou in this thread. I would bet others have broke the law also in this thread.

Then you have a guy in this thread posting pics I highly doubt he has permission to post. Yet in other threads when it's his buddies pics that get posted he spouts off about how people should respect other people and not post pics if they aren't yours.

I believe both of those are the definition of hypocrisy.

Maybe TR knew the unit was closed and called to ask why? Maybe the game department said he could kill a bull there. If I got the ok to kill something in the Water Shed from the game department I would if there was something in there I wanted to kill.

What's the rule in Washington about picking up dead heads? Against the law correct? I know a guy that has picked up two big bulls that the game department said he could. So what's the difference between that, and shooting a bull in a closed unit if the game department actually did give permission?

I don't really care if TR is found guilty or not. Him shooting a bull there saves a bull in a unit I might actually get to hunt.  But the hypocrisy in this thread is pretty bad. Carry on though and keep acting like angels.

scouting from a plane is legal. There are laws about how soon you can hunt afterwards.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: NOCK NOCK on June 08, 2016, 06:24:15 AM
So Branden, what you are saying is; you support illegal activity... Especially if it furthers your chances in another area???
And

That you yourself have never broken a law.
Have you EVER went above the speed limit?
Hypocrit calling out hypocracy..... That's good stuff  :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Jpmiller on June 08, 2016, 06:34:09 AM
I know of this case only what I have read on this site and a few very slanted news articles. If I am following correctly there is only speculation that TR was trying to circumnavigate a rule he understood by calling WDFW and asking for clarification.

Assuming he was given the go ahead from the state on a rule he truly didn't know what would be the wrongdoing? I cannot think of any better way to go about getting clarification.

I own a small business in the construction industry and when I had to take the registered side sewer co tractors test in Seattle ALOT of the rules were confusing to me. Alot of those same rules made sense to others.

Because one thing seems very clear to you doesn't make it so for everyone. That is nothing to do with how smart you, I, or anyone else is and is something we all (myself included) need remember in our lives.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on June 08, 2016, 06:51:54 AM
I do think wdfw could do better job in wording where the tag is valid.  Why can't they simply list the gmu's that are off limits instead of making the hunter research whether or not the unit has a season for branched antler bulls?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 08, 2016, 07:02:42 AM
I know of this case only what I have read on this site and a few very slanted news articles.

i wonder how many of those news articles (or folks on here for that matter) will volunteer an appolagy if hes found innocent? still havnet seen any thing in print (news paper or hunting forum) recanting the "killed it in one GMU snuck it to another story" and that was a sure thing slam dunk iron clad aspect of this story too. according to all the experts...
Title: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bobcat on June 08, 2016, 07:34:11 AM
I know of this case only what I have read on this site and a few very slanted news articles.

i wonder how many of those news articles (or folks on here for that matter) will volunteer an appolagy if hes found innocent? still havnet seen any thing in print (news paper or hunting forum) recanting the "killed it in one GMU snuck it to another story" and that was a sure thing slam dunk iron clad aspect of this story too. according to all the experts...

Why apologize or recant statements that are 100% true? The bull elk was killed by Reichert in a GMU for which his elk tag was not valid. And it was immediately moved to another location which happened to be a different GMU.

This unsubstantiated rumor that he had permission from the WDFW- well, that may or may not enable him to beat this in court. That we don't know.

I bet the news reporters who wrote stories on this gave Reichert an opportunity to comment. I wonder why he didn't come out and say "the WDFW told me it was okay."?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 08, 2016, 07:38:34 AM
no doubt the bull was proccessed off site. i cant count how many animals ive shot,then put in my truck, driven somewhere else and proccesd them. pretty standard practice or do you guys just eat the whole thing right there. the way the story was told/written was this was done in an attemt to decieve. who are you trying to fool when you hang a deer in your garage? slander is slander even if you dont like the guy
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bobcat on June 08, 2016, 07:44:14 AM
You're the one who used the wording "snuck it to another GMU." It's a fact that it was moved, I don't know that that has any bearing on the case. It was killed illegally, because it was in a closed unit. Simple.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 08, 2016, 07:49:20 AM
from the Yakima herald. and then blasted on the first half of this thread. i guess it doesnt say "snuck" your right. no implied meaning here, transporting game to another location to proccess it isnt standard practice for every hunter ever...

"After shooting the elk, Reichert and a small group of Ellensburg residents who had helped him locate the bull loaded it into a truck. According to eyewitnesses, the elk was then driven to a private field in the 328 unit and field-dressed"
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on June 08, 2016, 07:50:42 AM
from the Yakima herald. and then blasted on the first half of this thread. i guess it doesnt say "snuck" your right. no implied meaning here, transporting game to another location to proccess it isnt standard practice for every hunter ever...

"After shooting the elk, Reichert and a small group of Ellensburg residents who had helped him locate the bull loaded it into a truck. According to eyewitnesses, the elk was then driven to a private field in the 328 unit and field-dressed"

That is exactly what happened, pretty much to the letter.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you're saying. Are you implying that's not what happened?
For the record, I'm not saying there's anything wrong with them doing this. The farmer probably didn't want a gutpile in the middle of his field.

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 08, 2016, 07:55:27 AM
from the Yakima herald. and then blasted on the first half of this thread. i guess it doesnt say "snuck" your right. no implied meaning here, transporting game to another location to proccess it isnt standard practice for every hunter ever...

"After shooting the elk, Reichert and a small group of Ellensburg residents who had helped him locate the bull loaded it into a truck. According to eyewitnesses, the elk was then driven to a private field in the 328 unit and field-dressed"

That is exactly what happened, pretty much to the letter.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you're saying. Are you implying that's not what happened?
For the record, I'm not saying there's anything wrong with them doing this. The farmer probably didn't want a gutpile in the middle of his field.

you really dont want to see what the implied meaning is of this statement in he paper is huh? your not really that naive are you? like i said slander is slander.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: pianoman9701 on June 08, 2016, 08:03:14 AM
no doubt the bull was proccessed off site. i cant count how many animals ive shot,then put in my truck, driven somewhere else and proccesd them. pretty standard practice or do you guys just eat the whole thing right there. the way the story was told/written was this was done in an attemt to decieve. who are you trying to fool when you hang a deer in your garage? slander is slander even if you dont like the guy

I don't really care where he processed the elk, although unless the "private field" where he processed it was his field or that of the guide(s), processing it there is hugely suspect. I would bet that 99.99% of people who don't process their kill right where it lays do it at home or at the home of their hunting partner. But an even more important piece of information is this: What unit did he enter on the required harvest report? if he reported the elk was killed in the 328 unit, then he's tried to hide the fact that he shot it in the 334. This is key to confirming not only that he was misinformed by the WDFW, but that he also didn't try to hide the fact it was shot in 334. Do you know the answer to this question?

"After shooting the elk, Reichert and a small group of Ellensburg residents who had helped him locate the bull loaded it into a truck. According to eyewitnesses, the elk was then driven to a private field in the 328 unit and field-dressed."
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on June 08, 2016, 08:11:55 AM
from the Yakima herald. and then blasted on the first half of this thread. i guess it doesnt say "snuck" your right. no implied meaning here, transporting game to another location to proccess it isnt standard practice for every hunter ever...

"After shooting the elk, Reichert and a small group of Ellensburg residents who had helped him locate the bull loaded it into a truck. According to eyewitnesses, the elk was then driven to a private field in the 328 unit and field-dressed"

That is exactly what happened, pretty much to the letter.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you're saying. Are you implying that's not what happened?
For the record, I'm not saying there's anything wrong with them doing this. The farmer probably didn't want a gutpile in the middle of his field.

you really dont want to see what the implied meaning is of this statement in he paper is huh? your not really that naive are you? like i said slander is slander.

Well if you think that's slander, I'm not sure what to tell you. Implied or not, the bull was picked up whole, ungutted, and taken to another person's home/shop for processing. That has been established. I'm not sure how putting into type exactly what happened is slanderous.
Maybe it's a conspiracy.

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: pianoman9701 on June 08, 2016, 08:16:39 AM
WA doesn't award punitive damages. An award for slander would be granted only for a proven documentable financial loss.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on June 08, 2016, 08:20:11 AM
I'm no lawyer but that sure isn't slander in my book.  Like Jackelope said, it seems the news article stated precisely what happened (at least what we've been told happened). 

And it is a point that is worth pointing out; people can draw their own conclusions if they wish based on the facts.  Myself, I don't really find it all that suspect that it was moved.  Based on the pics we've seen of where the bull was, I can understand not wanting to leave a gutpile right there for everyone to see. :twocents: 

But I can also understand someone drawing the conclusion that maybe they were trying to get away with something because how often do you hear of someone loading a whole ungutted animal up in a truck and gutting it somewhere else?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on June 08, 2016, 08:20:35 AM
WA doesn't award punitive damages. An award for slander would be granted only for a proven documentable financial loss.
Either way, it's not slander.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 08, 2016, 08:23:00 AM
I can see trying to defend a friend, or whatever. But come on...from the outside looking in, this does not look like a simple mistake, an oversight, or anything that could  possibly be legitimized with a phone call.

And compared to the several other websites I have seen this issue addressed, the discussion here has been calm and civilized.
What other sites is this being discussed on. I wanna see other train wrecks

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
Several pages here:
http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/11165637/Re:_Charges_Filed!!!__-_2015_W (http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/11165637/Re:_Charges_Filed!!!__-_2015_W)


In the comments, if you haven't seen this:
http://www.yakimaherald.com/news/local/hunter-facing-charges-after-death-of-beloved-elk-named-bullwinkle/article_844ec8ac-1a65-11e6-8639-53981ae0fc80.html (http://www.yakimaherald.com/news/local/hunter-facing-charges-after-death-of-beloved-elk-named-bullwinkle/article_844ec8ac-1a65-11e6-8639-53981ae0fc80.html)

A bit here; nothing new:
http://www.ifish.net/board/showthread.php?t=1243914 (http://www.ifish.net/board/showthread.php?t=1243914)

Letter to the editor, and comments:
http://www.dailyrecordnews.com/members/letter-as-a-hunter-disgusted-with-killing-of-bullwinkle/article_af72f16e-1e09-11e6-af5a-134c6e038aed.html (http://www.dailyrecordnews.com/members/letter-as-a-hunter-disgusted-with-killing-of-bullwinkle/article_af72f16e-1e09-11e6-af5a-134c6e038aed.html)

Hard to imagine a 'win', regardless of what the court decides.

The 24hourcampfire thread is hilarious! Started by none other than a JDHasty and he made most of the posts in the 5 page tread. Most of the rest of the posts were people bashing JDHasty. Funny thing about the ifish thread, yep JDHasty is there as well.

http://www.huntingpa.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=4099641#Post4099641

Here is yet another one all the way across the country in Pennsylvania,  anyone want to make any bets on who started that one? Yet again it was JDHasty........

So after Cboom (who impresses me as none other than kiticaashunter alter ego) stalked me all over this site for the better part of a month....  After I had left the prior thread alone for north of a couple weeks....  After I had been called out for a second time.... you better believe I responded.

Hope you enjoyed it, you have asked for every bit of what I have posted. 

And as for the Pennsylvania sites, I bought a scope form a woodchuck hunter and he invited me to join a site he and other chuck hunters post on.  They pointed me toward the fact that Todd Reichert of Salkum WA has been the primary subject of a heck of a lot of controversy in their State. They invited me over to the other sites they post on.   I bet TR sure wishes you had let sleeping dogs lie.

Sorry to disappoint you but no alter egos here. You sure seem to put yourself out there as a guy that doesn't like to see the rules broken. I have an honest question,  have you ever been sited for breaking any game laws?

Come on jd answer the simple question
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 08, 2016, 08:23:28 AM
from the Yakima herald. and then blasted on the first half of this thread. i guess it doesnt say "snuck" your right. no implied meaning here, transporting game to another location to proccess it isnt standard practice for every hunter ever...

"After shooting the elk, Reichert and a small group of Ellensburg residents who had helped him locate the bull loaded it into a truck. According to eyewitnesses, the elk was then driven to a private field in the 328 unit and field-dressed"

That is exactly what happened, pretty much to the letter.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you're saying. Are you implying that's not what happened?
For the record, I'm not saying there's anything wrong with them doing this. The farmer probably didn't want a gutpile in the middle of his field.

you really dont want to see what the implied meaning is of this statement in he paper is huh? your not really that naive are you? like i said slander is slander.

Well if you think that's slander, I'm not sure what to tell you. Implied or not, the bull was picked up whole, ungutted, and taken to another person's home/shop for processing. That has been established. I'm not sure how putting into type exactly what happened is slanderous.
Maybe it's a conspiracy.

i guess that answers the second quistion in my sentance there. fair enough
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on June 08, 2016, 08:24:56 AM
I can see trying to defend a friend, or whatever. But come on...from the outside looking in, this does not look like a simple mistake, an oversight, or anything that could  possibly be legitimized with a phone call.

And compared to the several other websites I have seen this issue addressed, the discussion here has been calm and civilized.
What other sites is this being discussed on. I wanna see other train wrecks

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
Several pages here:
http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/11165637/Re:_Charges_Filed!!!__-_2015_W (http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/11165637/Re:_Charges_Filed!!!__-_2015_W)


In the comments, if you haven't seen this:
http://www.yakimaherald.com/news/local/hunter-facing-charges-after-death-of-beloved-elk-named-bullwinkle/article_844ec8ac-1a65-11e6-8639-53981ae0fc80.html (http://www.yakimaherald.com/news/local/hunter-facing-charges-after-death-of-beloved-elk-named-bullwinkle/article_844ec8ac-1a65-11e6-8639-53981ae0fc80.html)

A bit here; nothing new:
http://www.ifish.net/board/showthread.php?t=1243914 (http://www.ifish.net/board/showthread.php?t=1243914)

Letter to the editor, and comments:
http://www.dailyrecordnews.com/members/letter-as-a-hunter-disgusted-with-killing-of-bullwinkle/article_af72f16e-1e09-11e6-af5a-134c6e038aed.html (http://www.dailyrecordnews.com/members/letter-as-a-hunter-disgusted-with-killing-of-bullwinkle/article_af72f16e-1e09-11e6-af5a-134c6e038aed.html)

Hard to imagine a 'win', regardless of what the court decides.

The 24hourcampfire thread is hilarious! Started by none other than a JDHasty and he made most of the posts in the 5 page tread. Most of the rest of the posts were people bashing JDHasty. Funny thing about the ifish thread, yep JDHasty is there as well.

http://www.huntingpa.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=4099641#Post4099641

Here is yet another one all the way across the country in Pennsylvania,  anyone want to make any bets on who started that one? Yet again it was JDHasty........

So after Cboom (who impresses me as none other than kiticaashunter alter ego) stalked me all over this site for the better part of a month....  After I had left the prior thread alone for north of a couple weeks....  After I had been called out for a second time.... you better believe I responded.

Hope you enjoyed it, you have asked for every bit of what I have posted. 

And as for the Pennsylvania sites, I bought a scope form a woodchuck hunter and he invited me to join a site he and other chuck hunters post on.  They pointed me toward the fact that Todd Reichert of Salkum WA has been the primary subject of a heck of a lot of controversy in their State. They invited me over to the other sites they post on.   I bet TR sure wishes you had let sleeping dogs lie.

Sorry to disappoint you but no alter egos here. You sure seem to put yourself out there as a guy that doesn't like to see the rules broken. I have an honest question,  have you ever been sited for breaking any game laws?

Come on jd answer the simple question
from the Yakima herald. and then blasted on the first half of this thread. i guess it doesnt say "snuck" your right. no implied meaning here, transporting game to another location to proccess it isnt standard practice for every hunter ever...

"After shooting the elk, Reichert and a small group of Ellensburg residents who had helped him locate the bull loaded it into a truck. According to eyewitnesses, the elk was then driven to a private field in the 328 unit and field-dressed"

That is exactly what happened, pretty much to the letter.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you're saying. Are you implying that's not what happened?
For the record, I'm not saying there's anything wrong with them doing this. The farmer probably didn't want a gutpile in the middle of his field.

you really dont want to see what the implied meaning is of this statement in he paper is huh? your not really that naive are you? like i said slander is slander.

Well if you think that's slander, I'm not sure what to tell you. Implied or not, the bull was picked up whole, ungutted, and taken to another person's home/shop for processing. That has been established. I'm not sure how putting into type exactly what happened is slanderous.
Maybe it's a conspiracy.

i guess that answers the second quistion in my sentance there. fair enough

:chuckle:

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: pianoman9701 on June 08, 2016, 08:25:37 AM
So then, no answer for which unit was used on the harvest report?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 08, 2016, 08:32:10 AM
I can see trying to defend a friend, or whatever. But come on...from the outside looking in, this does not look like a simple mistake, an oversight, or anything that could  possibly be legitimized with a phone call.

And compared to the several other websites I have seen this issue addressed, the discussion here has been calm and civilized.
What other sites is this being discussed on. I wanna see other train wrecks

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
Several pages here:
http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/11165637/Re:_Charges_Filed!!!__-_2015_W (http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/11165637/Re:_Charges_Filed!!!__-_2015_W)


In the comments, if you haven't seen this:
http://www.yakimaherald.com/news/local/hunter-facing-charges-after-death-of-beloved-elk-named-bullwinkle/article_844ec8ac-1a65-11e6-8639-53981ae0fc80.html (http://www.yakimaherald.com/news/local/hunter-facing-charges-after-death-of-beloved-elk-named-bullwinkle/article_844ec8ac-1a65-11e6-8639-53981ae0fc80.html)

A bit here; nothing new:
http://www.ifish.net/board/showthread.php?t=1243914 (http://www.ifish.net/board/showthread.php?t=1243914)

Letter to the editor, and comments:
http://www.dailyrecordnews.com/members/letter-as-a-hunter-disgusted-with-killing-of-bullwinkle/article_af72f16e-1e09-11e6-af5a-134c6e038aed.html (http://www.dailyrecordnews.com/members/letter-as-a-hunter-disgusted-with-killing-of-bullwinkle/article_af72f16e-1e09-11e6-af5a-134c6e038aed.html)

Hard to imagine a 'win', regardless of what the court decides.

The 24hourcampfire thread is hilarious! Started by none other than a JDHasty and he made most of the posts in the 5 page tread. Most of the rest of the posts were people bashing JDHasty. Funny thing about the ifish thread, yep JDHasty is there as well.

http://www.huntingpa.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=4099641#Post4099641

Here is yet another one all the way across the country in Pennsylvania,  anyone want to make any bets on who started that one? Yet again it was JDHasty........

So after Cboom (who impresses me as none other than kiticaashunter alter ego) stalked me all over this site for the better part of a month....  After I had left the prior thread alone for north of a couple weeks....  After I had been called out for a second time.... you better believe I responded.

Hope you enjoyed it, you have asked for every bit of what I have posted. 

And as for the Pennsylvania sites, I bought a scope form a woodchuck hunter and he invited me to join a site he and other chuck hunters post on.  They pointed me toward the fact that Todd Reichert of Salkum WA has been the primary subject of a heck of a lot of controversy in their State. They invited me over to the other sites they post on.   I bet TR sure wishes you had let sleeping dogs lie.

Sorry to disappoint you but no alter egos here. You sure seem to put yourself out there as a guy that doesn't like to see the rules broken. I have an honest question,  have you ever been sited for breaking any game laws?

Come on jd answer the simple question
from the Yakima herald. and then blasted on the first half of this thread. i guess it doesnt say "snuck" your right. no implied meaning here, transporting game to another location to proccess it isnt standard practice for every hunter ever...

"After shooting the elk, Reichert and a small group of Ellensburg residents who had helped him locate the bull loaded it into a truck. According to eyewitnesses, the elk was then driven to a private field in the 328 unit and field-dressed"

That is exactly what happened, pretty much to the letter.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you're saying. Are you implying that's not what happened?
For the record, I'm not saying there's anything wrong with them doing this. The farmer probably didn't want a gutpile in the middle of his field.

you really dont want to see what the implied meaning is of this statement in he paper is huh? your not really that naive are you? like i said slander is slander.

Well if you think that's slander, I'm not sure what to tell you. Implied or not, the bull was picked up whole, ungutted, and taken to another person's home/shop for processing. That has been established. I'm not sure how putting into type exactly what happened is slanderous.
Maybe it's a conspiracy.

i guess that answers the second quistion in my sentance there. fair enough

:chuckle:

Something funny? Do you have more details on JDHastys poaching?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on June 08, 2016, 08:34:39 AM
If I had the gov tag, or raffle tag, I'd think I could hunt in said units, but hey, I'm just a big dumb lewis county boy, not neatly as savvy as the city slickers up north....thank God for the pierce and king county folks...

Do you read the regs?
I would assume most read the regs. Contrary to what some of you geniuses think they can be confusing. If they were as simple as some of you imply you would think the local game warden and regional comander would not have come to the conclusion it was legal after researching  it himself?

So, what you're saying is that a guy who spent probably $100K in total to shoot an elk made a mistake reading the regs. Before you said he had called because he knew the restrictions in that unit and received permission from Mr. Grant to shoot the elk anyway. Which is it? And, if he didn't know it was illegal, why would he have called Mr. Grant at all?
I am saying the call was made to find out the legality for weapons and the unit. A crystal clear answer was given on both notes.

 Seems the pertinent question would have been to ask if he could kill a branched antler bull in unit 334 with his tag.........but then that would have closed any loopholes right! :dunno:
  second was what was legal with that tag.
This is still vague and leaving wiggle room.

 Are you stating that Mr Grant was asked directly if a branched antler bull could be killed with that tag in unit 334, yes or no?

 And he gave authorization to kill a branched antler bull in 334, yes or no?

Come on Kiti answer the simple questions. :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JimmyHoffa on June 08, 2016, 08:43:21 AM
If I had the gov tag, or raffle tag, I'd think I could hunt in said units, but hey, I'm just a big dumb lewis county boy, not neatly as savvy as the city slickers up north....thank God for the pierce and king county folks...

Do you read the regs?
I would assume most read the regs. Contrary to what some of you geniuses think they can be confusing. If they were as simple as some of you imply you would think the local game warden and regional comander would not have come to the conclusion it was legal after researching  it himself?

So, what you're saying is that a guy who spent probably $100K in total to shoot an elk made a mistake reading the regs. Before you said he had called because he knew the restrictions in that unit and received permission from Mr. Grant to shoot the elk anyway. Which is it? And, if he didn't know it was illegal, why would he have called Mr. Grant at all?
I am saying the call was made to find out the legality for weapons and the unit. A crystal clear answer was given on both notes.

 Seems the pertinent question would have been to ask if he could kill a branched antler bull in unit 334 with his tag.........but then that would have closed any loopholes right! :dunno:
  second was what was legal with that tag.
This is still vague and leaving wiggle room.

 Are you stating that Mr Grant was asked directly if a branched antler bull could be killed with that tag in unit 334, yes or no?

 And he gave authorization to kill a branched antler bull in 334, yes or no?

Come on Kiti answer the simple questions. :chuckle:p
Sounds like what Trey Gowdy is going through.....
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on June 08, 2016, 08:44:42 AM
from the Yakima herald. and then blasted on the first half of this thread. i guess it doesnt say "snuck" your right. no implied meaning here, transporting game to another location to proccess it isnt standard practice for every hunter ever...

"After shooting the elk, Reichert and a small group of Ellensburg residents who had helped him locate the bull loaded it into a truck. According to eyewitnesses, the elk was then driven to a private field in the 328 unit and field-dressed"

That is exactly what happened, pretty much to the letter.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you're saying. Are you implying that's not what happened?
For the record, I'm not saying there's anything wrong with them doing this. The farmer probably didn't want a gutpile in the middle of his field.
:yeah:
before the article even came out there were accusations that the bull was shot in 334 and moved to 328.  At that time I said it could have been done at the farmers request, many people move the animal to remove the entrails somewhere else.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on June 08, 2016, 08:46:13 AM
Ok, after all of this I REALLY want to know if JDHASTY has ever been cited for any type of game violation.

Well JDHASTY????
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 08, 2016, 08:47:35 AM
ok, now in full context for those of you who havnt read it in a while. yeah, no implications here...


But according to enforcement officials, Reichert shot the elk in a field near the intersection of Gilbert and Grindrod roads. That location is in the Ellensburg game management unit (GMU 334), roughly 11/4 miles south of the irrigation canal separating that unit from the Naneum 328 unit.


Hunting of branch-antler elk is legal in the 328, while the 334 is open only for spike-only or antlerless elk — even for holders of special any-bull permits, say state Fish and Wildlife officials.


After shooting the elk, Reichert and a small group of Ellensburg residents who had helped him locate the bull loaded it into a truck. According to eyewitnesses, the elk was then driven to a private field in the 328 unit and field-dressed
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on June 08, 2016, 08:49:39 AM
I can see trying to defend a friend, or whatever. But come on...from the outside looking in, this does not look like a simple mistake, an oversight, or anything that could  possibly be legitimized with a phone call.

And compared to the several other websites I have seen this issue addressed, the discussion here has been calm and civilized.
What other sites is this being discussed on. I wanna see other train wrecks

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
Several pages here:
http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/11165637/Re:_Charges_Filed!!!__-_2015_W (http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/11165637/Re:_Charges_Filed!!!__-_2015_W)


In the comments, if you haven't seen this:
http://www.yakimaherald.com/news/local/hunter-facing-charges-after-death-of-beloved-elk-named-bullwinkle/article_844ec8ac-1a65-11e6-8639-53981ae0fc80.html (http://www.yakimaherald.com/news/local/hunter-facing-charges-after-death-of-beloved-elk-named-bullwinkle/article_844ec8ac-1a65-11e6-8639-53981ae0fc80.html)

A bit here; nothing new:
http://www.ifish.net/board/showthread.php?t=1243914 (http://www.ifish.net/board/showthread.php?t=1243914)

Letter to the editor, and comments:
http://www.dailyrecordnews.com/members/letter-as-a-hunter-disgusted-with-killing-of-bullwinkle/article_af72f16e-1e09-11e6-af5a-134c6e038aed.html (http://www.dailyrecordnews.com/members/letter-as-a-hunter-disgusted-with-killing-of-bullwinkle/article_af72f16e-1e09-11e6-af5a-134c6e038aed.html)

Hard to imagine a 'win', regardless of what the court decides.

The 24hourcampfire thread is hilarious! Started by none other than a JDHasty and he made most of the posts in the 5 page tread. Most of the rest of the posts were people bashing JDHasty. Funny thing about the ifish thread, yep JDHasty is there as well.

http://www.huntingpa.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=4099641#Post4099641

Here is yet another one all the way across the country in Pennsylvania,  anyone want to make any bets on who started that one? Yet again it was JDHasty........

So after Cboom (who impresses me as none other than kiticaashunter alter ego) stalked me all over this site for the better part of a month....  After I had left the prior thread alone for north of a couple weeks....  After I had been called out for a second time.... you better believe I responded.

Hope you enjoyed it, you have asked for every bit of what I have posted. 

And as for the Pennsylvania sites, I bought a scope form a woodchuck hunter and he invited me to join a site he and other chuck hunters post on.  They pointed me toward the fact that Todd Reichert of Salkum WA has been the primary subject of a heck of a lot of controversy in their State. They invited me over to the other sites they post on.   I bet TR sure wishes you had let sleeping dogs lie.

Sorry to disappoint you but no alter egos here. You sure seem to put yourself out there as a guy that doesn't like to see the rules broken. I have an honest question,  have you ever been sited for breaking any game laws?

Come on jd answer the simple question
from the Yakima herald. and then blasted on the first half of this thread. i guess it doesnt say "snuck" your right. no implied meaning here, transporting game to another location to proccess it isnt standard practice for every hunter ever...

"After shooting the elk, Reichert and a small group of Ellensburg residents who had helped him locate the bull loaded it into a truck. According to eyewitnesses, the elk was then driven to a private field in the 328 unit and field-dressed"

That is exactly what happened, pretty much to the letter.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you're saying. Are you implying that's not what happened?
For the record, I'm not saying there's anything wrong with them doing this. The farmer probably didn't want a gutpile in the middle of his field.

you really dont want to see what the implied meaning is of this statement in he paper is huh? your not really that naive are you? like i said slander is slander.

Well if you think that's slander, I'm not sure what to tell you. Implied or not, the bull was picked up whole, ungutted, and taken to another person's home/shop for processing. That has been established. I'm not sure how putting into type exactly what happened is slanderous.
Maybe it's a conspiracy.

i guess that answers the second quistion in my sentance there. fair enough

:chuckle:

Something funny? Do you have more details on JDHastys poaching?

I was chuckling regarding the comments from lord grizzly about the slander in the news article(or lack thereof).

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Gringo31 on June 08, 2016, 08:50:15 AM
I don't know that JD's record has anything to do with it.  If I'm busted for speeding, I want the law applied to everyone. 

The only game ticket I've ever got was when I was 15 I got a ticked for hunting ducks on Jan 2nd and hadn't purchased the next years license.  Does that make it wrong for me to take a stand against law breaking and poaching?   
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on June 08, 2016, 08:51:28 AM
ok, now in full context for those of you who havnt read it in a while. yeah, no implications here...


But according to enforcement officials, Reichert shot the elk in a field near the intersection of Gilbert and Grindrod roads. That location is in the Ellensburg game management unit (GMU 334), roughly 11/4 miles south of the irrigation canal separating that unit from the Naneum 328 unit.


Hunting of branch-antler elk is legal in the 328, while the 334 is open only for spike-only or antlerless elk — even for holders of special any-bull permits, say state Fish and Wildlife officials.


After shooting the elk, Reichert and a small group of Ellensburg residents who had helped him locate the bull loaded it into a truck. According to eyewitnesses, the elk was then driven to a private field in the 328 unit and field-dressed


Please specify your idea of slander from this segment of the news article. Please be specific.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 08, 2016, 08:51:40 AM
I can see trying to defend a friend, or whatever. But come on...from the outside looking in, this does not look like a simple mistake, an oversight, or anything that could  possibly be legitimized with a phone call.

And compared to the several other websites I have seen this issue addressed, the discussion here has been calm and civilized.
What other sites is this being discussed on. I wanna see other train wrecks

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
Several pages here:
http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/11165637/Re:_Charges_Filed!!!__-_2015_W (http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/11165637/Re:_Charges_Filed!!!__-_2015_W)


In the comments, if you haven't seen this:
http://www.yakimaherald.com/news/local/hunter-facing-charges-after-death-of-beloved-elk-named-bullwinkle/article_844ec8ac-1a65-11e6-8639-53981ae0fc80.html (http://www.yakimaherald.com/news/local/hunter-facing-charges-after-death-of-beloved-elk-named-bullwinkle/article_844ec8ac-1a65-11e6-8639-53981ae0fc80.html)

A bit here; nothing new:
http://www.ifish.net/board/showthread.php?t=1243914 (http://www.ifish.net/board/showthread.php?t=1243914)

Letter to the editor, and comments:
http://www.dailyrecordnews.com/members/letter-as-a-hunter-disgusted-with-killing-of-bullwinkle/article_af72f16e-1e09-11e6-af5a-134c6e038aed.html (http://www.dailyrecordnews.com/members/letter-as-a-hunter-disgusted-with-killing-of-bullwinkle/article_af72f16e-1e09-11e6-af5a-134c6e038aed.html)

Hard to imagine a 'win', regardless of what the court decides.

The 24hourcampfire thread is hilarious! Started by none other than a JDHasty and he made most of the posts in the 5 page tread. Most of the rest of the posts were people bashing JDHasty. Funny thing about the ifish thread, yep JDHasty is there as well.

http://www.huntingpa.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=4099641#Post4099641

Here is yet another one all the way across the country in Pennsylvania,  anyone want to make any bets on who started that one? Yet again it was JDHasty........

So after Cboom (who impresses me as none other than kiticaashunter alter ego) stalked me all over this site for the better part of a month....  After I had left the prior thread alone for north of a couple weeks....  After I had been called out for a second time.... you better believe I responded.

Hope you enjoyed it, you have asked for every bit of what I have posted. 

And as for the Pennsylvania sites, I bought a scope form a woodchuck hunter and he invited me to join a site he and other chuck hunters post on.  They pointed me toward the fact that Todd Reichert of Salkum WA has been the primary subject of a heck of a lot of controversy in their State. They invited me over to the other sites they post on.   I bet TR sure wishes you had let sleeping dogs lie.

Sorry to disappoint you but no alter egos here. You sure seem to put yourself out there as a guy that doesn't like to see the rules broken. I have an honest question,  have you ever been sited for breaking any game laws?

Come on jd answer the simple question
from the Yakima herald. and then blasted on the first half of this thread. i guess it doesnt say "snuck" your right. no implied meaning here, transporting game to another location to proccess it isnt standard practice for every hunter ever...

"After shooting the elk, Reichert and a small group of Ellensburg residents who had helped him locate the bull loaded it into a truck. According to eyewitnesses, the elk was then driven to a private field in the 328 unit and field-dressed"

That is exactly what happened, pretty much to the letter.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you're saying. Are you implying that's not what happened?
For the record, I'm not saying there's anything wrong with them doing this. The farmer probably didn't want a gutpile in the middle of his field.

you really dont want to see what the implied meaning is of this statement in he paper is huh? your not really that naive are you? like i said slander is slander.

Well if you think that's slander, I'm not sure what to tell you. Implied or not, the bull was picked up whole, ungutted, and taken to another person's home/shop for processing. That has been established. I'm not sure how putting into type exactly what happened is slanderous.
Maybe it's a conspiracy.

i guess that answers the second quistion in my sentance there. fair enough

:chuckle:

Something funny? Do you have more details on JDHastys poaching?

I was chuckling regarding the comments from lord grizzly about the slander in the news article(or lack thereof).

still think that huh?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on June 08, 2016, 08:53:47 AM
I don't know that JD's record has anything to do with it.  If I'm busted for speeding, I want the law applied to everyone. 

The only game ticket I've ever got was when I was 15 I got a ticked for hunting ducks on Jan 2nd and hadn't purchased the next years license.  Does that make it wrong for me to take a stand against law breaking and poaching?   

Agreed. Everyone has skeletons in their closet. I don't know anything about Hasty's past. What's it got to do with anything?
Let's look at folks who got a DUI in the past. Now they're staunch advocates against drinking and driving. They go to schools and give speeches to kids denouncing drinking and getting behind the wheel. Is that a bad thing?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on June 08, 2016, 08:55:15 AM
I can see trying to defend a friend, or whatever. But come on...from the outside looking in, this does not look like a simple mistake, an oversight, or anything that could  possibly be legitimized with a phone call.

And compared to the several other websites I have seen this issue addressed, the discussion here has been calm and civilized.
What other sites is this being discussed on. I wanna see other train wrecks

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
Several pages here:
http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/11165637/Re:_Charges_Filed!!!__-_2015_W (http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/11165637/Re:_Charges_Filed!!!__-_2015_W)


In the comments, if you haven't seen this:
http://www.yakimaherald.com/news/local/hunter-facing-charges-after-death-of-beloved-elk-named-bullwinkle/article_844ec8ac-1a65-11e6-8639-53981ae0fc80.html (http://www.yakimaherald.com/news/local/hunter-facing-charges-after-death-of-beloved-elk-named-bullwinkle/article_844ec8ac-1a65-11e6-8639-53981ae0fc80.html)

A bit here; nothing new:
http://www.ifish.net/board/showthread.php?t=1243914 (http://www.ifish.net/board/showthread.php?t=1243914)

Letter to the editor, and comments:
http://www.dailyrecordnews.com/members/letter-as-a-hunter-disgusted-with-killing-of-bullwinkle/article_af72f16e-1e09-11e6-af5a-134c6e038aed.html (http://www.dailyrecordnews.com/members/letter-as-a-hunter-disgusted-with-killing-of-bullwinkle/article_af72f16e-1e09-11e6-af5a-134c6e038aed.html)

Hard to imagine a 'win', regardless of what the court decides.

The 24hourcampfire thread is hilarious! Started by none other than a JDHasty and he made most of the posts in the 5 page tread. Most of the rest of the posts were people bashing JDHasty. Funny thing about the ifish thread, yep JDHasty is there as well.

http://www.huntingpa.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=4099641#Post4099641

Here is yet another one all the way across the country in Pennsylvania,  anyone want to make any bets on who started that one? Yet again it was JDHasty........

So after Cboom (who impresses me as none other than kiticaashunter alter ego) stalked me all over this site for the better part of a month....  After I had left the prior thread alone for north of a couple weeks....  After I had been called out for a second time.... you better believe I responded.

Hope you enjoyed it, you have asked for every bit of what I have posted. 

And as for the Pennsylvania sites, I bought a scope form a woodchuck hunter and he invited me to join a site he and other chuck hunters post on.  They pointed me toward the fact that Todd Reichert of Salkum WA has been the primary subject of a heck of a lot of controversy in their State. They invited me over to the other sites they post on.   I bet TR sure wishes you had let sleeping dogs lie.

Sorry to disappoint you but no alter egos here. You sure seem to put yourself out there as a guy that doesn't like to see the rules broken. I have an honest question,  have you ever been sited for breaking any game laws?

Come on jd answer the simple question
from the Yakima herald. and then blasted on the first half of this thread. i guess it doesnt say "snuck" your right. no implied meaning here, transporting game to another location to proccess it isnt standard practice for every hunter ever...

"After shooting the elk, Reichert and a small group of Ellensburg residents who had helped him locate the bull loaded it into a truck. According to eyewitnesses, the elk was then driven to a private field in the 328 unit and field-dressed"

That is exactly what happened, pretty much to the letter.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you're saying. Are you implying that's not what happened?
For the record, I'm not saying there's anything wrong with them doing this. The farmer probably didn't want a gutpile in the middle of his field.

you really dont want to see what the implied meaning is of this statement in he paper is huh? your not really that naive are you? like i said slander is slander.

Well if you think that's slander, I'm not sure what to tell you. Implied or not, the bull was picked up whole, ungutted, and taken to another person's home/shop for processing. That has been established. I'm not sure how putting into type exactly what happened is slanderous.
Maybe it's a conspiracy.

i guess that answers the second quistion in my sentance there. fair enough

:chuckle:

Something funny? Do you have more details on JDHastys poaching?

I was chuckling regarding the comments from lord grizzly about the slander in the news article(or lack thereof).

still think that huh?

Yes.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 08, 2016, 08:55:56 AM
heres a sample of one of the comments from the herald site, and exactly what they were going for when they wrote the artical. you guys really have that much faith in the mediea to think they dont have alterier motives?



Like · Reply · 4 · May 17, 2016 5:32am
....












Paul McBride · Attorney at Kring & Chung, Sacramento

I dsupport this guy's right to hunt, especially if he pays $50,000 for the privilege. That being said, the fact that they moved the animal from a no-kill zone to a kill zone before dressing it proves they knew they were in the wrong. This reminds me of the dentist who killed the lion in Africa. Sorry, he needs to lose his hunting privileges for awhile, and pay a fine.

Like · Reply · 2 · May 16, 2016 3:44pm
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on June 08, 2016, 09:00:09 AM
I don't know that JD's record has anything to do with it.  If I'm busted for speeding, I want the law applied to everyone. 

The only game ticket I've ever got was when I was 15 I got a ticked for hunting ducks on Jan 2nd and hadn't purchased the next years license.  Does that make it wrong for me to take a stand against law breaking and poaching?
It sounds like maybe yes, if you have broken the law you can't speak out against anyone else breaking the law.

I was going to ask how someone else's  errors justitfies taking this bull.  If someone gets a ticket for not having a discover pass does that then mean they can't comment here on this thread?  Does that take away some sort of credibility?  I think everyone makes mistakes and it is what you do after that that counts.

What frustrates me about this whole incident is with the previous issue in the blues I think I would make sure I was so far away from anything controversial as far as hunting went moving forward.  Lesson learned, moving on, I would make sure that didn't happen again.  With all of his money and with the great latitude that raffle tag had he didn't need to be putting himself in this situation.

He had to know this would ruffle somebodies feathers, just shoot a different bull.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: pianoman9701 on June 08, 2016, 09:04:44 AM
So then, no answer for which unit was used on the harvest report?
:dunno:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on June 08, 2016, 09:15:18 AM
This is temporarily locked.
To be continued...
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bearpaw on June 08, 2016, 05:36:51 PM
This is a private forum, please review the forum rules regarding membership, and pay special attention the portions i made bold:
http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,163263.0.html
Quote
Forum Rules & Policies
This forum is intended to be a family friendly and helpful venue for hunters, fishers, trappers, and other sportsmen. Unauthorized advertising is not allowed, contact forum management for available advertising opportunities. Forum management reserves the right to remove any member who violates the forum rules/policies or who in their opinion is actively working against the common interests of hunters or other sportsmen. This is a privately owned site with the following rules and policies:

You agree, through your use of this forum, that you will not post any material which is false, defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, name calling, belittling, threatening, negativity in success topics, unproven accusations, obscene, profanity or intended profanity, sexually oriented, adult material, invasive of a person's privacy, or in violation of any International, State, or United States Federal law. You also agree not to post any copyrighted material unless you own the copyright or you have written consent from the owner of the copyrighted material. You further agree that you are granting Hunting-Washington perpetual unrestricted use of your material. Spam, flooding, unauthorized advertising, chain letters, pyramid schemes, and solicitations are not allowed on this forum.

Note that it is impossible for the staff or the owners of this forum to confirm the validity of material. Please remember that we do not actively monitor all posted material, and as such, are not responsible for the content contained within. We do not warrant the accuracy, authenticity, completeness, or usefulness of any information presented. The posted material expresses the views of the author, and not necessarily the views of this forum, its staff, its subsidiaries, or this forum's owner. Anyone who feels that posted material or a private message is objectionable is encouraged to notify an administrator or moderator of this forum immediately. The staff and the owner of this forum reserve the right to edit or remove any content, if they determine that removal is needed it is a manual process so removal or editing may not occur immediately. This policy applies to member profile information as well.

You remain solely responsible for the content that you post. Furthermore, you agree to indemnify and hold harmless the owners of this forum, any related websites to this forum, its staff, and its subsidiaries. The owners of this forum reserve the right to reveal your identity (or any other related information collected on this service) in the event of a formal complaint, legal, or lawful action arising from your use of this forum.

You have the ability, as you register, to choose a username under which you may post your material, only appropriate usernames will be allowed. You may only have one username and any change to your username requires preapproval by an administrator. With this user account you are about to register, you agree to never give your password out to another person except an administrator, for your protection and for validity reasons. You also agree to NEVER use another person's account for any reason.  We also HIGHLY recommend you use a complex and unique password for your account, to prevent account theft.

After you register and login to this forum, you will be able to fill out a detailed profile and post content on the forum. It is your responsibility to present acceptable information and material. Your IP address is recorded and may be used in the event that you need to be banned from this forum or your ISP contacted due to a major violation of this agreement.

Also note that the software places a cookie, a text file containing bits of information (such as your username and password), in your browser's cache. This is ONLY used to keep you logged in/out. The software does not collect or send any other form of information to your computer.

All forum rules and policies are subject to administrative discretion and may be changed without notice at any time.

Thank You,
Forum Management Team

I am told that more threats of lawsuits are flying around from both sides of this Reichert topic, this forum wishes to remain neutral on the subject, however, we are in a position where one side wants comments removed and the other side wants comments to stay, we simply can't satisfy both sides.

I've removed two Reichert topics in the past due to threats of lawsuit. ENOUGH! The members want to talk about this issue, they can discuss it as long as they don't make false slanderous statements or otherwise violate the forum rules.

NOTICE: If anyone feels a statement is untruthful and slanderous and wants it removed please send me your comments with your basis for removal, I will check with the accused party, if they can't substantiate the truthfulness of the statement, it will be removed. I will remove any statement requested removed that cannot be substantiated, if needed I will remove this whole bullwinkle topic. Anyone who is not a member including Mr Reichert can contact me directly if you feel any comment is untruthful or slanderous and it will be removed unless substantiated as being truthful.

Send removal requests to dale@hunting-washington.com

We have tried to fairly moderate this topic, if it must be removed and if another topic pops up I will forbid any moderator from moderating, we will not moderate it at all, it can take it's course with each person who comments being responsible for their own comments.

If you wish to remain a member of this forum the lawsuit threats and any other threats must stop, if you receive this message by pm or email I expect a reply back saying that all threats toward members of this forum will end or I will be suspending your membership at the end of the day. Please stop making threats using this forum.

This message is being sent by pm and by email to several members. I await responses from those members regarding their membership continuation.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bearpaw on June 08, 2016, 07:51:47 PM
I've received a couple messages that seem unclear about my post, let me put it more simply:

If you want to sue someone notify them outside of the forum. If you want to remain a member of this forum I want your word that you won’t be threatening members with lawsuits through the H-W forum. All these lawsuit threats are done on this forum!

I have provided my email address so anyone can contact me in the future if they feel they are being slandered by someone else. dale@hunting-washington.com
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bearpaw on June 08, 2016, 09:26:57 PM
This topic has been moved to off-topics which is out of the public view. This board receives very little moderation, however if we receive a claim that an accusation is false and defamatory it will be removed unless evidence can be provided that the accusation is true.

The topic is now available for member discussion.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on June 08, 2016, 09:33:11 PM
So then, no answer for which unit was used on the harvest report?
:dunno:

That hopefully will come out in court if the dept is helping the prosecuting attorney. I wouldn't be surprised to see unit 328 thinking nobody would ever think twice about it when compiling the stats for 2015.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on June 09, 2016, 05:58:04 AM
I had decided to leave this topic alone for a while, but as was the case on the last thread after I had decided to "leave sleeping dogs lie," wherein Cboom decided it was in his interest to stalk me all around this site calling me out...

Anyway, as you have seen evidence of, the only thing anyone can find any evidence of, after doing exhaustive research, re: me being a game law scofflaw amounts to a single minor violation that took place well north of two decades ago.  Yes I had a minor violation and I paid a small fine and I learned from that experience.  That is all there is, basically the game law equivalent of a "minor traffic violation" ~ 25 years ago in a motor vehicle.  There is "no there there." 

FWIW, The violation was not hunting w/lead shot, which carries mandatory suspension and my hunting privilege has never been suspended nor, to the best of my knowledge, have I ever been investigated for any violation that caries license suspension.

Re this case:  I have posted as fact what I am confident are facts re: this incident.  I have given an opinion re: how I think this case should be treated i.e. I think it should be prosecuted.  I have referenced an earlier incident and given my opinion re: how that earlier incident has affected my opinion in this case.  I have made it clear that there are certain details re: that earlier case that I am relying on my memory of and have made it perfectly clear that this is what I recall when posting such.  I have provided documentation that validates facts I have referenced in that earlier case. 

And... the only thing that this individual can come up with to impeach what I have posted is the fact that I have a paid a fine for a minor violation and in posting that didn't even bother to get the facts straight???  That in and of itself should be, and is telling. 

Now, my intentions are to leave this topic alone for a while.   

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: TheHunt on June 09, 2016, 09:05:04 AM
Thank God!!!   Please take a breather... 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: X-Force on June 09, 2016, 09:09:48 AM


Now, my intentions are to leave this topic alone for a while.   



Minutes or hours?  :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on June 09, 2016, 11:46:44 AM
If I had the gov tag, or raffle tag, I'd think I could hunt in said units, but hey, I'm just a big dumb lewis county boy, not neatly as savvy as the city slickers up north....thank God for the pierce and king county folks...

Do you read the regs?
I would assume most read the regs. Contrary to what some of you geniuses think they can be confusing. If they were as simple as some of you imply you would think the local game warden and regional comander would not have come to the conclusion it was legal after researching  it himself?

So, what you're saying is that a guy who spent probably $100K in total to shoot an elk made a mistake reading the regs. Before you said he had called because he knew the restrictions in that unit and received permission from Mr. Grant to shoot the elk anyway. Which is it? And, if he didn't know it was illegal, why would he have called Mr. Grant at all?
I am saying the call was made to find out the legality for weapons and the unit. A crystal clear answer was given on both notes.

 Seems the pertinent question would have been to ask if he could kill a branched antler bull in unit 334 with his tag.........but then that would have closed any loopholes right! :dunno:
  second was what was legal with that tag.
This is still vague and leaving wiggle room.

 Are you stating that Mr Grant was asked directly if a branched antler bull could be killed with that tag in unit 334, yes or no?

 And he gave authorization to kill a branched antler bull in 334, yes or no?

Come on Kiti answer the simple questions. :chuckle:

 Yawn........still waiting!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on June 09, 2016, 11:58:27 AM
My guess is after all of the warnings people are going to be pretty tight lipped about this until it works its way through court.  I think every angle of this has been beat to death and nothing new or groundbreaking will come out until then is my guess.  Unless somebody in the group starts getting nervous, makes a deal and starts singing like a canary.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: whacker1 on June 09, 2016, 11:59:04 AM
another newspaper article:
This time conjoined with 2 other subjects - Idaho & Montana
http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2016/jun/08/landers-judge-wealthy-hunters-by-what-they-give-no/


A year’s worth of fund-raising banquets and silent auctions can be matched in a heartbeat by a single check from a big-bucks beneficiary.

Hunters, anglers, nature lovers and the entire planet benefit from rich people who unleash some of their fortunes for preserving wildlife habitat rather than building another getaway mansion in a pristine setting. So to them, we say thanks.

But examples in Idaho, Montana and Washington stand out as warnings to be aware of people who try to buy our trust.

In Idaho, members of the state Fish and Game Commission are getting the cold shoulder from Gov. Butch Otter, likely for taking a stand against legislators’ wishes to give more hunting tag options for the wealthy.



The commission took its stand last fall after surveying the state’s sportsmen and finding they opposed proposals to allow large landowners to sell hunting tags. They especially opposed auctioning more of their coveted once-in-a-lifetime big-game hunting opportunities to the highest bidders.

The commissioners stood up for the average hunter. Now the governor is looking to replace former commission chairman Mark Doerr of Twin Falls and current chairman Will Naillon.

“The commission did not change policy due to the overwhelming input of the sportsmen,” Doerr said in a statement. “The legislators were not happy and it is unfortunate their influence impacted the governor’s decision on commission reappointments.”
“The personal, political and financial gain offered by special interests must be intoxicating for those in leadership in the Idaho Legislature, because they continually ignore the will of the majority of their constituents, in this case, the sportsmen of Idaho.”

In Montana, an out-of-stater who owns prime fishing and hunting acreage has bought himself a cozy relationship with Ducks Unlimited despite his shady attempts to block average sportsmen from public natural resources.

In October, Montana sportsman and freelance writer Don Thomas wrote a piece entitled A Rift Runs Through It, for Outside Bozeman magazine, about the legal battle in Montana to secure and maintain public access to Ruby River, a southwestern Montana tributary to the Beaverhead.

Thomas pointed out how James Cox Kennedy, the Atlanta-based billionaire chairman of media giant Cox Enterprises, had worked the courts in attempts to prevent legal public access.

Ducks Unlimited’s response was to kill the messenger. Instead of recognizing Thomas for standing up for the average sportsmen who bid on waterfowl art at DU auctions, officers dropped his long-time column in DU Magazine and said, “Goodbye troublemaker.”

DU has honored Kennedy for being among the wetlands conservation organization’s biggest donors, and, okay, that serves the group’s mission. But he’s buying more than habitat for ducks.

Kennedy owns property along eight miles of the Ruby River and has been involved in a long-running litigation that has gone to Montana’s Supreme Court once and may find its way back.

In December, the Associated Press reported that Kennedy had donated $100,000 to a secretive conservative group accused of breaking Montana’s campaign finance laws to influence elections.
Kennedy and others contributed to issue-advocacy group Montana Growth Network, which financed ads supporting the winner of the 2012 state Supreme Court election and opposing the two other candidates.

The biggest “dark money” checks came from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and Charles Schwab of Charles Schwab Corp., each of whom gave $200,000. Schwab also is involved in challenging Montana’s stream access laws, which sportsmen consider vital to preserving their right to reach public waters as wealthy people continue to buy and lock up choice properties.

What’s alarming is that while Kennedy is buying votes and court decisions to secure more than his share of heaven in the West, he’s also apparently buying the favor of conservation groups that sportsmen consider to be on their side.

DU, while shunning the messenger – Thomas, assisted in the nomination of Kennedy for a national wetlands conservationist of the year award from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

So far the stream access lawsuits have been denied repeatedly in court thanks to the efforts of the Montana Public Land and Water Access Association. We’ll have to see if the case returns to the state’s top court to know if Kennedy’s money served his purpose in the judicial elections.

In Washington, a day in court has been postponed for a wealthy West Side hunter charged last with shooting a virtually tame trophy bull elk last season in a closed area near Ellensburg.

Tod Reichert, 76, of Salkum, is charged with second-degree unlawful hunting of big game, a gross misdemeanor, for allegedly having locals lead him to the bull residents called “Bullwinkle.” Reichert is charged with shooting the trophy elk in an area closed to hunting branch-antlered bulls. Apparently he then drove the bull’s carcass to a legal hunting area in order to tag and field dress it.


Reichert’s is well known in elk “conservation” circles for his willingness to spend a fortune on raffle and auction tags to facilitate his trophy hunting.

Described as “a strong supporter of elk hunting and improving elk habitat,” he has killed several record-book bulls by outbidding other rich trophy hunters to get coveted tags, including $40,000 for the 2007-08 New Mexico Governor’s Tag, $19,000 for the 2001 Oregon Governor’s Tag, $16,000 for the 2003 edition, and an unpublished amount for the 1999 California tule bull elk tag.

But trophy hunting has a way of stalking the ragged edge of poaching when hunters get greedy.

In 2007, Reichert bought Washington’s first East Side Governor’s Tag and killed a trophy elk in the Umatilla National Forest. However, he was later indicted for hiring a helicopter service to spot elk for the hunt, which is unlawful in Washington and most other states. He was also charged with lying to wildlife authorities about the guiding services he hired.

Reichert’s sentence included a $5,000 fine and a two-year ban from entering a national forest.

The pretrial hearing in his current “Bullwinkle” case originally set for May 31 in Lower Kittitas District Court was postponed until June 21. It’s possible that Reichert could be using his attorneys to postpone the hearing as long as it takes for him to fill his two current trophy tags purchased in March at the tag auctions facilitated this winter by the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation.

A lot is at stake. Reichert bid $85,000 for the Pennsylvania tag and $75,000 for the Washington tag.

If he goes to court and is found guilty before those hunts, Reichert could lose his hunting privileges before those seasons start.

Either way, his auction bids will be used by RMEF and the state of Washington for wildlife conservation. Some people are okay with this system. Others aren’t so sure.

Bottom line: A wealthy man can buy just about anything he wants, but he should still have to earn our respect.



Published: June 8, 2016, 7 p.m. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JimmyHoffa on June 09, 2016, 12:14:00 PM
Quote
Apparently he then drove the bull’s carcass to a legal hunting area in order to tag and field dress it.
The story gets juicier by the day.  I wonder if they ran over a litter of puppies on the way to the other field?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on June 09, 2016, 12:25:58 PM
Quote
Apparently he then drove the bull’s carcass to a legal hunting area in order to tag and field dress it.
The story gets juicier by the day.  I wonder if they ran over a litter of puppies on the way to the other field?
That caught my eye as well, I don't remember seeing that before.  Maybe new stuff will be coming out.  Now I am kind of curious to know what unit they reported it was killed in.  Too bad the tags aren't like a salmon punch card where you have to write down the area you are upon harvest.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: whacker1 on June 09, 2016, 12:38:23 PM
Quote
Apparently he then drove the bull’s carcass to a legal hunting area in order to tag and field dress it.
The story gets juicier by the day.  I wonder if they ran over a litter of puppies on the way to the other field?
That caught my eye as well, I don't remember seeing that before.  Maybe new stuff will be coming out.  Now I am kind of curious to know what unit they reported it was killed in.  Too bad the tags aren't like a salmon punch card where you have to write down the area you are upon harvest.

That part was well documented and admitted that they drove from 334 to 328 to not leave a gut pile in the landowners field in 334 per the landowner's request.  If you read through the last 42 pages, you will find it somewhere.   :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JimmyHoffa on June 09, 2016, 12:42:38 PM
Yes, the field dress part of it.  First about the didn't tag it immediately.  So according to this article, they didn't even tag it until they were in the other field.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: whacker1 on June 09, 2016, 12:48:20 PM
Yes, the field dress part of it.  First about the didn't tag it immediately.  So according to this article, they didn't even tag it until they were in the other field.

Got it, I missed that part....Thank you for pointing it out.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on June 09, 2016, 12:56:12 PM
Yes, the field dress part of it.  First about the didn't tag it immediately.  So according to this article, they didn't even tag it until they were in the other field.
:yeah: I would love to know if that is true.  I wish the tags were like a salmon punch card where upon harvest you have to mark down what it is you harvested and what marine area.

Does anyone know if with the raffle tags you have to report differently than normal?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bobcat on June 09, 2016, 12:57:54 PM
I know if you look at the 2015 harvest report it shows nothing but spike bulls being taken out of 334.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Holg3107 on June 09, 2016, 01:17:43 PM
Just a question: On page 51 of the 2016 regs (I know this is this years so it may not apply) GMU 334 is listed under early archery as a spike only unit (not a TRUE SPIKE only). Would this constitute that it is open for branch antlered bulls as you could potentially shoot a 6x1? Would this then make the tag legal? Obviously ethically this situation is insane but legally I'm curious?

I also see that on page 49 GMU 334 is listed as True Spike only? Just wondering if this is a typo or what?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bob33 on June 09, 2016, 01:30:17 PM
Just a question: On page 51 of the 2016 regs (I know this is this years so it may not apply) GMU 334 is listed under early archery as a spike only unit (not a TRUE SPIKE only). Would this constitute that it is open for branch antlered bulls as you could potentially shoot a 6x1? Would this then make the tag legal? Obviously ethically this situation is insane but legally I'm curious?

I also see that on page 49 GMU 334 is listed as True Spike only? Just wondering if this is a typo or what?
A 6x1 is a spike, but not a true spike. A 6x1 could be considered a branch antlered bull. GMU 334 has different requirements for modern firearm and archery seasons.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: NOCK NOCK on June 09, 2016, 01:39:47 PM
One new thing that I caught was in one of the lasts posts that got nuked,
The individual was comparing the actions of a member who received a ticket on Jan 2 because he inadvertently forgot to buy his new license for that year. It was stated that it was a simple mistake and compared it to Bullwinkle's killing as a mistake. All along it was claimed that TR had permission from WDFW to shoot.......now it was referenced as a mistake.   :dunno:   Interesting

Again, Regardless of ANY of the "He said/She said", legal or not, permission granted or not, understanding the regs. or not, jealous or not, hypocrite or not, spike or branched bull or not...........One simple thing should have really decided this crews choice of whether or not to shoot this bull....

Is this the right thing to do as a hunter? (Or a person that calls themselves a hunter)


This case has a few small similarities to something that affected myself 1.5 years ago.  By all standard reasoning I should be agreeing with the pro TR guys. I too did not understand a part of the regs. (Who may apply for any moose/sheep) so I called WDFW 3 times and received wrong info all 3 times)  So I went with their info and then lost an opportunity for a year. Sure I complained a bit on here, and took some heat on here as well, but I did the right thing. I used my talents & brain, made some calls and wrote some letters to Olympia. End result....I was successful in having the confusing language changed in the 2016 regs. This benefits ALL hunters.

So, regardless of all the legalities,  Did Mr. Reichert do the right thing by shooting this particular bull, in this particular scenario?
 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Holg3107 on June 09, 2016, 01:41:47 PM
I understand that Bob, my question is since it is open during early archery season for Spikes, not True Spikes (which could be a branch antlered bull on one side) does that open the unit up for the raffle tag to shoot a branch antlered bull as it is "technically" open to branch antlered bull hunting and not only "True Spikes"?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on June 09, 2016, 02:00:59 PM
I know if you look at the 2015 harvest report it shows nothing but spike bulls being taken out of 334.
:yike:  Maybe he reported late and is going to pay the additional fee for not reporting when he gets his 2016 license.  That will teach him.  :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on June 09, 2016, 02:11:45 PM
One new thing that I caught was in one of the lasts posts that got nuked,
The individual was comparing the actions of a member who received a ticket on Jan 2 because he inadvertently forgot to buy his new license for that year. It was stated that it was a simple mistake and compared it to Bullwinkle's killing as a mistake. All along it was claimed that TR had permission from WDFW to shoot.......now it was referenced as a mistake.   :dunno:   Interesting

Again, Regardless of ANY of the "He said/She said", legal or not, permission granted or not, understanding the regs. or not, jealous or not, hypocrite or not, spike or branched bull or not...........One simple thing should have really decided this crews choice of whether or not to shoot this bull....

Is this the right thing to do as a hunter? (Or a person that calls themselves a hunter)


This case has a few small similarities to something that affected myself 1.5 years ago.  By all standard reasoning I should be agreeing with the pro TR guys. I too did not understand a part of the regs. (Who may apply for any moose/sheep) so I called WDFW 3 times and received wrong info all 3 times)  So I went with their info and then lost an opportunity for a year. Sure I complained a bit on here, and took some heat on here as well, but I did the right thing. I used my talents & brain, made some calls and wrote some letters to Olympia. End result....I was successful in having the confusing language changed in the 2016 regs. This benefits ALL hunters.

So, regardless of all the legalities,  Did Mr. Reichert do the right thing by shooting this particular bull, in this particular scenario?
Even now that it has happened I still struggle with "what would I do" in this situation.  There is a lot to think about.  I would like to say I would have steered clear of this bull but I just don't know.  I don't think you can know until the decision is right in front of you.

Hind sight being 20/20 I think most would say he didn't do the right thing as far as public perception goes.  And the general public is who we really need to worry about, they outnumber hunters by a lot.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on June 09, 2016, 02:14:57 PM
I understand that Bob, my question is since it is open during early archery season for Spikes, not True Spikes (which could be a branch antlered bull on one side) does that open the unit up for the raffle tag to shoot a branch antlered bull as it is "technically" open to branch antlered bull hunting and not only "True Spikes"?

334 is not open to the taking of branch antler bulls.  Just because they allow the occasional elk that happens to have screwy headgear to be taken (in the case of a 6x1) doesn't mean that the unit is open to branched bulls.  The 6X1 is still a spike.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 724wd on June 09, 2016, 02:17:24 PM
I understand that Bob, my question is since it is open during early archery season for Spikes, not True Spikes (which could be a branch antlered bull on one side) does that open the unit up for the raffle tag to shoot a branch antlered bull as it is "technically" open to branch antlered bull hunting and not only "True Spikes"?

IF this bull could have been classified as a spike, it would have been fine.  In no universe could this bull be considered a spike, which is the only legal bull to take in the unit.  Mr. Reichert killed an illegal bull for that unit. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Colville on June 09, 2016, 03:46:47 PM
There are branch bull seasons and there are spike seasons in the regs.  334 has no branch bull season and any bull with a branch has to be a spike on the other side.  It is, for the purpose of the reg, a spike.  That spike having more than one point on one side does not make that season a branch antlered bull season.

But yes, this is the kind of way a weasel might attempt to cloud the issue so that their greed can be fed. Trashing hunters reps and putting a bird right in the face of the locals. At least two birds were killed with one stone in that respect.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Holg3107 on June 09, 2016, 03:52:52 PM
Agree Colville, Its the only thing I could think of as to why anyone would even think there was any chance of this being legal. I'm definitely not trying to justify just trying to figure out if there is any way someone could "legally" spin this in a way that could justify the action or in the very least justify making the initial phone calls.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: teanawayslayer on June 09, 2016, 03:57:13 PM
Agree Colville, Its the only thing I could think of as to why anyone would even think there was any chance of this being legal. I'm definitely not trying to justify just trying to figure out if there is any way someone could "legally" spin this in a way that could justify the action or in the very least justify making the initial phone calls.
greed is a funny thing!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on June 09, 2016, 04:01:23 PM
Why are you guys so upset over a legally taken elk?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Colville on June 09, 2016, 04:05:04 PM
ohhhh Dan-o...  stop stirring, soups done.  :P
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on June 09, 2016, 04:10:58 PM
What?

Ot was an honest question.......     unless you like to convict people based on internet testimony.   :-)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: idahohuntr on June 09, 2016, 04:17:23 PM
Why are you guys so upset over a legally taken elk?
:chuckle: Never mind those pesky criminal charges filed by a County Prosecutor. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 724wd on June 09, 2016, 04:21:43 PM
Why are you guys so upset over a legally taken elk?
:chuckle: Never mind those pesky criminal charges filed by a County Prosecutor.

and that no one is disputing that the elk was taken in a unit with no branch antler season, which is a requirement for use of the tag...
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on June 09, 2016, 04:32:07 PM
Agree Colville, Its the only thing I could think of as to why anyone would even think there was any chance of this being legal. I'm definitely not trying to justify just trying to figure out if there is any way someone could "legally" spin this in a way that could justify the action or in the very least justify making the initial phone calls.

Let's not forget guys, the experts or "guys in the know" stated that "2 phone calls" were not in regards to spike or no spike, they were in regards to weapon use. :twocents:

Kiti can't seem to answer the relevant questions.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on June 09, 2016, 04:33:13 PM
Yep, you're right.

No need for an actual court of law when you've got the Hunt Washington posse saddled up and ready to ride.

Who needs due process when you can just decide on the internet.

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 09, 2016, 04:38:37 PM
Agree Colville, Its the only thing I could think of as to why anyone would even think there was any chance of this being legal. I'm definitely not trying to justify just trying to figure out if there is any way someone could "legally" spin this in a way that could justify the action or in the very least justify making the initial phone calls.

Let's not forget guys, the experts or "guys in the know" stated that "2 phone calls" were not in regards to spike or no spike, they were in regards to weapon use. :twocents:

Kiti can't seem to answer the relevant questions.

I have answered it more than once.  Again you seem to have problems with reading comprehension. I'm not going to keep repeatin myself because you can't keep up.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on June 09, 2016, 04:43:03 PM
Yep, you're right.

No need for an actual court of law when you've got the Hunt Washington posse saddled up and ready to ride.

Who needs due process when you can just decide on the internet.
What is that?   :dunno:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bob33 on June 09, 2016, 04:51:22 PM
Yep, you're right.

No need for an actual court of law when you've got the Hunt Washington posse saddled up and ready to ride.

Who needs due process when you can just decide on the internet.
Does not expressing an opinion also work with, say, football players? ;)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on June 09, 2016, 04:59:23 PM
You got me there, Bob.      :)

But, in my defense,....... Kam sucks!

(and on a slightly more serious note, I never said he committed a crime.    There are guys on here egging each other on about his supposed guilt, and they back it up by saying things like " he could come on here and defend himself."

I don't know the guy from Adam, but I hate internet kangaroo courts where someone went to school with the neighbor of a guy that sold a car to a relative of someone who heard the "real story".

P.s.    Kam sucks.    8)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bob33 on June 09, 2016, 05:06:53 PM
You got me there, Bob.      :)

But, in my defense,....... Kam sucks!

(and on a slightly more serious note, I never said he committed a crime.    There are guys on here egging each other on about his supposed guilt, and they back it up by saying things like " he could come on here and defend himself."

I don't know the guy from Adam, but I hate internet kangaroo courts where someone went to school with the neighbor of a guy that sold a car to a relative of someone who heard the "real story".

P.s.    Kam sucks.    8)
First degree suckage. Book 'em, Danno. :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: idahohuntr on June 09, 2016, 05:23:34 PM
Yep, you're right.

No need for an actual court of law when you've got the Hunt Washington posse saddled up and ready to ride.

Who needs due process when you can just decide on the internet.
What is that?   :dunno:
An Internet forum does not decide guilt or innocence, impose legal punishments, fines etc.  You guys whining make it sound like people are not allowed to discuss, comment, provide opinions, theories, or perspectives until the entire matter has been fully adjudicated.  Get real.  Oh and here's a tip...dont do shady, unethical, or illegal things and you won't likely be the source of public criticism :tup:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on June 09, 2016, 05:31:03 PM
Well then, by all means carry on with sentencing.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: idahohuntr on June 09, 2016, 05:42:37 PM
Well then, by all means carry on with sentencing.
I think North Korea has a model of public criticism and media coverage that would suit you well.  Perhaps you should move there.  :chuckle:  This freedom of expression in the good ol USA just isn't your thing.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on June 09, 2016, 05:52:06 PM
 Kind of like freedom of expression.....   i'm just not into internet bullying.

But you go right on opining about this issue.   Don't let lack of facts slow you down one bit.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: blackveltbowhunter on June 09, 2016, 06:14:28 PM
Actually  facts are the problem.  :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bobcat on June 09, 2016, 06:31:13 PM
There isn't a lack of facts in this case. It's so simple- an elk killed where it wasn't legal. This isn't an opinion- it's a fact.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 724wd on June 09, 2016, 06:32:06 PM
Kind of like freedom of expression.....   i'm just not into internet bullying.

But you go right on opining about this issue.   Don't let lack of facts slow you down one bit.

Lack of facts?!  the only thing in question is if this guy from the WDFW gave permission to shoot a branch antler bull in this closed unit, and if he has the authority to do so.  If the courts say, "Yup!  Mr. JimBob was within his duties to give Mr. Reichart permission to shoot a branch bull in a closed unit," then we all go home shrugging our shoulders.  But what happens if the WDFW guy says, "They never asked about shooting a branch bull in a closed unit!  They only wanted to know if they could shoot an elk with a rifle in a firearms restricted area," well, then things get a bit more interesting!  Or if the judge reads the regs book and sees it's clearly spelled out that the permit used is not valid in a unit not open to branch bulls, and that the hunt took place in a unit not open to branch bulls, well, things still get interesting! 

No one disputes where the elk was killed.  the question about if a spikeX6 is a branch bull, thus making the unit open to branch bulls is bunk, as there is NO WAY IN THE WORLD this bull could be considered a spike.  No one can dispute the unit is closed to branch bulls.  It all hinges on whether or not the person at the WDFW gave permission and if he has the authority to do so. 

Some may be jealous, some may consider this an unethical hunt.  Me, personally, I could care less about either.  I would be just as passionate if this was a 3x4 raghorn shot by joe blow down the street.  I consider this incident poaching, as Mr. Reichart violated the clearly published rules regarding where this permit can be used.  I think calling the WDFW to attempt to gain permission to violate the clearly published rules and allow this man to kill a bull is evidence of pretty shifty thinking.  Would it seem like a totally normal thing to call the local government in an attempt to gain permission to kill a mule deer in the city limits of Twisp, even though it's not an area where that is legal?  I have seen no clear evidence the person at the WDFW gave permission to kill a branch bull in a closed unit.  It has been alluded to, but no evidence produced.  I don't believe the person at the WDFW has legal authority to grant permission to killed a branch bull in a closed unit.  I consider this incident poaching. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on June 09, 2016, 06:50:14 PM
Here are a few facts:
1.  I wasn't there.
2.  You weren't there.
3.  Elvis wasn't there.
4.  You consider this incident poaching even though you don't really know the facts.
5.  You're entitled to do that....  free speech and all.
6.   Until ALL the facts come out, you're still just speculating.

You kind of remind me of my grandma and her friends when they get to talking.  They are also really good at gossiping based on rumors, although they tend to get theirs from the National Enquirer.

Have a great night.

Dan
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bob33 on June 09, 2016, 06:52:30 PM
If you weren't there, how do you know Elvis wasnt?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 724wd on June 09, 2016, 06:53:47 PM
and how do you know I wasn't, Dan-o?  You weren't there, remember?   :dunno:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Coastal_native on June 09, 2016, 06:55:04 PM
"Clear evidence"?  Sooooo...Where do I go to find that on this thread?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bob33 on June 09, 2016, 06:55:30 PM
Maybe just speculation? ;)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on June 09, 2016, 06:57:40 PM
If you weren't there, how do you know Elvis wasnt?

Good point.

One version of the story has Elvis making the first call.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on June 09, 2016, 06:58:43 PM
and how do you know I wasn't, Dan-o?  You weren't there, remember?   :dunno:

You are correct.

I heard that you were the guide.

Can you enlighten us on how the calls went?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on June 09, 2016, 07:01:38 PM
"Clear evidence"?  Sooooo...Where do I go to find that on this thread?

Didn't you see the part where he deemed it clear evidence because he knows someone who knows someone who heard it at the gas station.

Rock solid evidence.   No need to waste court time here.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: NOCK NOCK on June 09, 2016, 07:01:44 PM
You got me there, Bob.      :)

But, in my defense,....... Kam sucks!

(and on a slightly more serious note, I never said he committed a crime.    There are guys on here egging each other on about his supposed guilt, and they back it up by saying things like " he could come on here and defend himself."

I don't know the guy from Adam, but I hate internet kangaroo courts where someone went to school with the neighbor of a guy that sold a car to a relative of someone who heard the "real story".

P.s.    Kam sucks.    8)


For a guy who hates all this  :yeah:
You sure are posting a lot here, and giving your opinion as well.   :twocents: :twocents: :dunno: just sayin not trying to pick on ya  :hello:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 724wd on June 09, 2016, 07:02:39 PM
and how do you know I wasn't, Dan-o?  You weren't there, remember?   :dunno:

You are correct.

I heard that you were the guide.

Can you enlighten us on how the calls went?

How did the calls go?  to quote another... "I have answered it more than once.  Again you seem to have problems with reading comprehension. I'm not going to keep repeatin myself because you can't keep up."  :dunno: :chuckle: :hello:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on June 09, 2016, 07:11:26 PM
You got me there, Bob.      :)

But, in my defense,....... Kam sucks!

(and on a slightly more serious note, I never said he committed a crime.    There are guys on here egging each other on about his supposed guilt, and they back it up by saying things like " he could come on here and defend himself."

I don't know the guy from Adam, but I hate internet kangaroo courts where someone went to school with the neighbor of a guy that sold a car to a relative of someone who heard the "real story".

P.s.    Kam sucks.    8)


For a guy who hates all this  :yeah:
You sure are posting a lot here, and giving your opinion as well.   :twocents: :twocents: :dunno: just sayin not trying to pick on ya  :hello:

You are correct, sir.

I have been sucked into the Bullwinkle Vortex, and I can't seem to get out.......      :yike:

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: NOCK NOCK on June 09, 2016, 07:16:49 PM
Roger that.......me too.  8)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on June 09, 2016, 07:26:06 PM
I say we start a new rumor.

Let's see how far we can go with this one:

Bullwinkle was a transgendered bull, because he "felt" like a cow.   He was only shot as a result of a heinous Euro-centric micro-agression.

Worse yet, he was shot in his "safe place".

If you are a white male, you are fully responsible for this atrocity and owe reparations.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Coastal_native on June 09, 2016, 07:42:34 PM
Sounds like speculation to me.  If I'm half white, half Indian (feather, not dot), half Filipino, and half other, how responsible am I for this atrocity?  Also, which box do I check?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on June 09, 2016, 07:43:47 PM
Sounds like speculation to me.  If I'm half white, half Indian (feather, not dot), half Filipino, and half other, how responsible am I for this atrocity?  Also, which box do I check?

Feather, dot?  :dunno:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on June 09, 2016, 07:47:11 PM
East Indian/ coastal native
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Coastal_native on June 09, 2016, 07:49:29 PM
That's a racial/cultural stereotype used to differentiate between Native Americans and people from India.  Indians with feathers on their heads vs. Indians with dots on their foreheads.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on June 09, 2016, 07:50:06 PM
East Indian/ coastal native

I call the dots India Indians.  :dunno:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: chester on June 09, 2016, 07:51:29 PM
Sounds like speculation to me.  If I'm half white, half Indian (feather, not dot), half Filipino, and half other, how responsible am I for this atrocity?  Also, which box do I check?
All depends what you're applying for.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Coastal_native on June 09, 2016, 07:52:55 PM
At least no one is questioning my math.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on June 09, 2016, 08:05:17 PM
At least no one is questioning my math.

It's 2016......    Any answer is a good answer as long as you feel good about it.

Besides, I HAVE been accused of committing micro-aggression, and I learned my lesson.    You feel free to be 200% of anything you want and I will continue to express shame at being of northern European stock!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on June 09, 2016, 08:26:10 PM
I say we start a new rumor.

Let's see how far we can go with this one:

Bullwinkle was a transgendered bull, because he "felt" like a cow.   He was only shot as a result of a heinous Euro-centric micro-agression.

Worse yet, he was shot in his "safe place".

If you are a white male, you are fully responsible for this atrocity and owe reparations.

I say let's not let this atrocity stand!!!!!!!!!

OCCUPY KITTITAS!!!!!!!!!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 09, 2016, 08:27:52 PM
Yep, you're right.

No need for an actual court of law when you've got the Hunt Washington posse saddled up and ready to ride.

Who needs due process when you can just decide on the internet.
What is that?   :dunno:
An Internet forum does not decide guilt or innocence, impose legal punishments, fines etc.  You guys whining make it sound like people are not allowed to discuss, comment, provide opinions, theories, or perspectives until the entire matter has been fully adjudicated.  Get real.  Oh and here's a tip...dont do shady, unethical, or illegal things and you won't likely be the source of public criticism :tup:

I don't think there has been a person on here that has a problem with an honest discussion.  The issue is the people that think they can be the judge,  jury, and excutioner behind a keyboard without having a clue of what actually happened. The hunting community in this state is in sad shape if this board is a representation of them as a whole. As far as your comment about  not doing unethical or shady  things if you want to stay out of the public eye, that is true at times. But how has that worked out for the thousands of people that have been convicted of crimes they didn't commit? Very sad you and others here are so quick to jump on a witchhunt. There really is no other explanation for it than extreme jealousy.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 09, 2016, 08:35:02 PM
I say we start a new rumor.

Let's see how far we can go with this one:

Bullwinkle was a transgendered bull, because he "felt" like a cow.   He was only shot as a result of a heinous Euro-centric micro-agression.

Worse yet, he was shot in his "safe place".

If you are a white male, you are fully responsible for this atrocity and owe reparations.

I say let's not let this atrocity stand!!!!!!!!!

OCCUPY KITTITAS!!!!!!!!!

I really don't know what to say to that  :o. But now that it seems to all be a free for all and I find my self in in the dreaded situation I need to take a seat in a public place, I may just realize I woke up a woman that morning if the men's room smells to bad....
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bob33 on June 09, 2016, 08:37:05 PM
There really is no other explanation for it than extreme jealousy.
Are you the judge and jury about that, or just the judge?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: NOCK NOCK on June 09, 2016, 08:43:42 PM
There really is no other explanation for it than extreme jealousy.
Are you the judge and jury about that, or just the judge?

 :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on June 09, 2016, 08:43:54 PM
There really is no other explanation for it than extreme jealousy.
Are you the judge and jury about that, or just the judge?


Whoa, whoa, WHOA!!!!!

Safe space violation.

(I'm having a feeling, and I'd like it to be validated.)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: NOCK NOCK on June 09, 2016, 08:45:51 PM
Dan o , you spelled violated wrong.  :o
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 09, 2016, 08:46:11 PM
There really is no other explanation for it than extreme jealousy.
Are you the judge and jury about that, or just the judge?

Nope, just pointing out the odvioise. I understand you folks from King County see things differently.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on June 09, 2016, 08:49:22 PM
There really is no other explanation for it than extreme jealousy.
Are you the judge and jury about that, or just the judge?

Nope, just pointing out the odvioise. I understand you folks from King County see things differently.

I kind of want to know what an odvioise is, but then I am from King County.......
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 09, 2016, 08:57:31 PM
There really is no other explanation for it than extreme jealousy.
Are you the judge and jury about that, or just the judge?

Nope, just pointing out the odvioise. I understand you folks from King County see things differently.

I kind of want to know what an odvioise is, but then I am from King County.......

Dano seems by looking at election results a small few of you guys in that country get it right. I would guess you may be one of the. By obvious I meant, no matter how much they hear, and what I have posted here is actually factual they will ignore it. They want things to go the way of thier personal feelings.  Innocence or guilt don't matter. Jealousy is the only logical reason for this?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: idahohuntr on June 09, 2016, 09:01:01 PM


Yep, you're right.

No need for an actual court of law when you've got the Hunt Washington posse saddled up and ready to ride.

Who needs due process when you can just decide on the internet.
What is that?   :dunno:
An Internet forum does not decide guilt or innocence, impose legal punishments, fines etc.  You guys whining make it sound like people are not allowed to discuss, comment, provide opinions, theories, or perspectives until the entire matter has been fully adjudicated.  Get real.  Oh and here's a tip...dont do shady, unethical, or illegal things and you won't likely be the source of public criticism :tup:

I don't think there has been a person on here that has a problem with an honest discussion.  The issue is the people that think they can be the judge,  jury, and excutioner behind a keyboard without having a clue of what actually happened. The hunting community in this state is in sad shape if this board is a representation of them as a whole. As far as your comment about  not doing unethical or shady  things if you want to stay out of the public eye, that is true at times. But how has that worked out for the thousands of people that have been convicted of crimes they didn't commit? Very sad you and others here are so quick to jump on a witchhunt. There really is no other explanation for it than extreme jealousy.

Nobody on here is or has suggested they are judge or jury.  Nor has anyone suggested they have some right or ability to legally punish Reichert.  But a whole bunch of folks on both sides have provided a lot of commentary because of interest in this topic...which you and others don't really like...well tough...and thank goodness Dale straightened everyone out on this stupid lawsuit threat bs. :tup:

Now, if you want to cry about wrongful convictions...maybe you should evaluate your buddy...Convicted liar, convicted poacher...he even admitted so by pleading guilty.  In the pending case he will get a fair trial and he will be well represented I'm sure by very competent lawyers, i would hope for nothing less.  But please, tell me how this is representative of someone wrongfully convicted?  Not to mention, much of the scorn he is receiving is the result of his previous illegal actions.

And if you think hunters in this state, if the HW members are representative, suggest we are a 'sad' group collectively...I don't know what to tell you.  I see a bunch of hunters looking out for the future of hunting by making sure we hold ourselves to some standards...such as obeying the law.

Last, I chuckle at these jealousy statements.  You are out of your mind if you think I'm jealous of Reichert.  I wouldn't trade places with him for anything.  Guys like you probably can't comprehend this, but my integrity and respect are worth a lot more to me than a trophy bull or a bunch of money.  I bet I sleep a lot better at night as well...it's obvious shining a light on these criminal charges is really bothering him and his accomplices...must suck to be the butt of jokes to every hunter in the state.  :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on June 09, 2016, 09:03:17 PM
I say we start a new rumor.

Let's see how far we can go with this one:

Bullwinkle was a transgendered bull, because he "felt" like a cow.   He was only shot as a result of a heinous Euro-centric micro-agression.

Worse yet, he was shot in his "safe place".

If you are a white male, you are fully responsible for this atrocity and owe reparations.

I say let's not let this atrocity stand!!!!!!!!!

OCCUPY KITTITAS!!!!!!!!!

I really don't know what to say to that  :o. But now that it seems to all be a free for all and I find my self in in the dreaded situation I need to take a seat in a public place, I may just realize I woke up a woman that morning if the men's room smells to bad....

I'm afraid the strain was more than he could bear, someone get the smelling salts I do believe kit has lost it.  :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JimmyHoffa on June 09, 2016, 09:05:11 PM
At least no one is questioning my math.
So, with that kind of math....50% is really 100%.   :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on June 09, 2016, 09:07:40 PM


Yep, you're right.

No need for an actual court of law when you've got the Hunt Washington posse saddled up and ready to ride.

Who needs due process when you can just decide on the internet.
What is that?   :dunno:
An Internet forum does not decide guilt or innocence, impose legal punishments, fines etc.  You guys whining make it sound like people are not allowed to discuss, comment, provide opinions, theories, or perspectives until the entire matter has been fully adjudicated.  Get real.  Oh and here's a tip...dont do shady, unethical, or illegal things and you won't likely be the source of public criticism :tup:

I don't think there has been a person on here that has a problem with an honest discussion.  The issue is the people that think they can be the judge,  jury, and excutioner behind a keyboard without having a clue of what actually happened. The hunting community in this state is in sad shape if this board is a representation of them as a whole. As far as your comment about  not doing unethical or shady  things if you want to stay out of the public eye, that is true at times. But how has that worked out for the thousands of people that have been convicted of crimes they didn't commit? Very sad you and others here are so quick to jump on a witchhunt. There really is no other explanation for it than extreme jealousy.

Nobody on here is or has suggested they are judge or jury.  Nor has anyone suggested they have some right or ability to legally punish Reichert.  But a whole bunch of folks on both sides have provided a lot of commentary because of interest in this topic...which you and others don't really like...well tough...and thank goodness Dale straightened everyone out on this stupid lawsuit threat bs. :tup:

Now, if you want to cry about wrongful convictions...maybe you should evaluate your buddy...Convicted liar, convicted poacher...he even admitted so by pleading guilty.  In the pending case he will get a fair trial and he will be well represented I'm sure by very competent lawyers, i would hope for nothing less.  But please, tell me how this is representative of someone wrongfully convicted?  Not to mention, much of the scorn he is receiving is the result of his previous illegal actions.

And if you think hunters in this state, if the HW members are representative, suggest we are a 'sad' group collectively...I don't know what to tell you.  I see a bunch of hunters looking out for the future of hunting by making sure we hold ourselves to some standards...such as obeying the law.

Last, I chuckle at these jealousy statements.  You are out of your mind if you think I'm jealous of Reichert.  I wouldn't trade places with him for anything.  Guys like you probably can't comprehend this, but my integrity and respect are worth a lot more to me than a trophy bull or a bunch of money.  I bet I sleep a lot better at night as well...it's obvious shining a light on these criminal charges is really bothering him and his accomplices...must suck to be the butt of jokes to every hunter in the state.  :chuckle:

 :yeah: :yeah: :yeah:

Sometimes money gets the best of a person!  :twocents:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Coastal_native on June 09, 2016, 09:10:40 PM
"Guys like you"...that's presumptuous.  Border line micro aggression.  Probably qualifies as a safe space violation.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on June 09, 2016, 09:41:06 PM
I can't remember the answer to this one:  If Morgan Grant said it was okay for TR to shoot a branch bull in 334, why would wdfw investigate and recommend the county prosecute? Or did they not recommend prosecution?   

Seems like the county would be wasting time and money by prosecution if the state official did in fact give the go ahead (even though he may not have technically had the authority).
???
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 09, 2016, 10:07:54 PM
I can't remember the answer to this one:  If Morgan Grant said it was okay for TR to shoot a branch bull in 334, why would wdfw investigate and recommend the county prosecute? Or did they not recommend prosecution?   

Seems like the county would be wasting time and money by prosecution if the state official did in fact give the go ahead (even though he may not have technically had the authority).
???

If you can find any evidence that WDFW recommended prosecution I would love to see it. That would be news to me.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bean Counter on June 09, 2016, 10:17:51 PM
"Guys like you"...that's presumptuous.  Border line micro aggression.  Probably qualifies as a safe space violation.


(http://img.docstoccdn.com/thumb/orig/109851826.png)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 724wd on June 09, 2016, 10:18:49 PM
I can't remember the answer to this one:  If Morgan Grant said it was okay for TR to shoot a branch bull in 334, why would wdfw investigate and recommend the county prosecute? Or did they not recommend prosecution?   

Seems like the county would be wasting time and money by prosecution if the state official did in fact give the go ahead (even though he may not have technically had the authority).
???

If you can find any evidence that WDFW recommended prosecution I would love to see it. That would be news to me.

I don't think there is anything concrete regarding that.  If I remember correctly it was reported by another member, but there is no real evidence.  I do wonder, however, why charges have been brought at all, if everything was above board?  :dunno:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on June 09, 2016, 10:20:33 PM
Agree Colville, Its the only thing I could think of as to why anyone would even think there was any chance of this being legal. I'm definitely not trying to justify just trying to figure out if there is any way someone could "legally" spin this in a way that could justify the action or in the very least justify making the initial phone calls.

Let's not forget guys, the experts or "guys in the know" stated that "2 phone calls" were not in regards to spike or no spike, they were in regards to weapon use. :twocents:

Kiti can't seem to answer the relevant questions.

I have answered it more than once.  Again you seem to have problems with reading comprehension. I'm not going to keep repeatin myself because you can't keep up.

 If you answered those questions Kiti then I apologize, I've looked through the entire thread and can't find it, I must have missed them.

 Can you supply the link to it please?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on June 09, 2016, 10:24:19 PM
Yep, you're right.

No need for an actual court of law when you've got the Hunt Washington posse saddled up and ready to ride.

Who needs due process when you can just decide on the internet.
What is that?   :dunno:
An Internet forum does not decide guilt or innocence, impose legal punishments, fines etc.  You guys whining make it sound like people are not allowed to discuss, comment, provide opinions, theories, or perspectives until the entire matter has been fully adjudicated.  Get real.  Oh and here's a tip...dont do shady, unethical, or illegal things and you won't likely be the source of public criticism :tup:

 Spot on!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on June 09, 2016, 10:37:36 PM
I say we start a new rumor.

Let's see how far we can go with this one:

Bullwinkle was a transgendered bull, because he "felt" like a cow.   He was only shot as a result of a heinous Euro-centric micro-agression.

Worse yet, he was shot in his "safe place".

If you are a white male, you are fully responsible for this atrocity and owe reparations.

I say let's not let this atrocity stand!!!!!!!!!

OCCUPY KITTITAS!!!!!!!!!

I really don't know what to say to that  :o. But now that it seems to all be a free for all and I find my self in in the dreaded situation I need to take a seat in a public place, I may just realize I woke up a woman that morning if the men's room smells to bad....

I'm afraid the strain was more than he could bear.

Lmao, one of my favorite movies Boss! :tup:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Reidus on June 10, 2016, 12:27:03 AM
This thread ain't no fun without JD :'(
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bean Counter on June 10, 2016, 12:40:49 AM
Did he get a vacation?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: chester on June 10, 2016, 12:46:05 AM
No he just took a break from this thread.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 10, 2016, 01:16:03 AM
I feel bad and want to clear something up here (he may want to clean that up on his record). I did accuse JDHasty of illegally using lead shot. Turns out that may not be the truth. If one does a criminal search that is what shows up on him. But the court docket shows is it pheasant kills and not reporting  A criminal violation as well. . One could call it poaching bird's?  I do know one thing if I had been accused of that and it wasn't true I would want my day in court. He didn't , as he went bail forfeiture.

I'm betting 90% on here like myself have never been cited for a game violation?  We all know how few wardens are out there. I can't help but wonder how many times this guy cheated us out of opportunities before and after he got cauht? Yet he leads the witchhunt on a bull that the game department said was ok?

Glass houses?










Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on June 10, 2016, 01:26:39 AM
I feel bad and want to clear something up here (he may want to clearn that up on his record). I did accuse JDHasty of illegally using lead shot. Turns out that may not be the truth. If one does a criminal search that is what shows up on him. But the court docket shows is not reporting pheasant kills A criminal infl action as well. . One could call it poaching bird's?  I do know one thing if I had been accused of that and it wasn't true I would want my day in court. He didn't , as he went bail forfeiture.

I'm betting 90% on here like myself have never been cited for a game violation?  We all know how few wardens are out there. I can't help but wonder how many times this guy cheated us out of opportunities before and after h3 got cought? Yet he leads the witchhunt on a bull that the game department said was ok?

 I'm confused, what does any of that have to do with Tod Reichert killing a bull in GMU 334?........nothing but trying to deflect from the real issue!!!

 How about you finally manning up and answering the questions you've been asked, or providing links proving you already have...... :chuckle:

 My guess is you will avoid it again, prove me wrong.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: chester on June 10, 2016, 01:27:11 AM
:yeah:


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 10, 2016, 01:51:49 AM
I feel bad and want to clear something up here (he may want to clearn that up on his record). I did accuse JDHasty of illegally using lead shot. Turns out that may not be the truth. If one does a criminal search that is what shows up on him. But the court docket shows is not reporting pheasant kills A criminal infl action as well. . One could call it poaching bird's?  I do know one thing if I had been accused of that and it wasn't true I would want my day in court. He didn't , as he went bail forfeiture.

I'm betting 90% on here like myself have never been cited for a game violation?  We all know how few wardens are out there. I can't help but wonder how many times this guy cheated us out of opportunities before and after h3 got cought? Yet he leads the witchhunt on a bull that the game department said was ok?

 I'm confused, what does any of that have to do with Tod Reichert killing a bull in GMU 334?........nothing but trying to deflect from the real issue!!!

 How about you finally manning up and answering the questions you've been asked, or providing links proving you already have...... :chuckle:

 My guess is you will avoid it again, prove me wrong.

In one case the party tried to make sure all was right. And that will come out in court.  In the situation I just described a real poacher was caught,  and I fact one that is very vocal for a mistake made by the game department and yet he tries to blame it on the hunter.

Fool or as I seen another call you wise one. Might be time to slow down. On this thread alone it has been proven you don't read well. Maybe we both should leave it there before we break any rules getting into your intelligence. That would be to easy.

Edited: I have answered the question countless times. Not going to do it for you again. You will just ask again.  Got no patience for ****, guess I better just say slow on here..
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on June 10, 2016, 01:54:48 AM
I feel bad and want to clear something up here (he may want to clearn that up on his record). I did accuse JDHasty of illegally using lead shot. Turns out that may not be the truth. If one does a criminal search that is what shows up on him. But the court docket shows is not reporting pheasant kills A criminal infl action as well. . One could call it poaching bird's?  I do know one thing if I had been accused of that and it wasn't true I would want my day in court. He didn't , as he went bail forfeiture.

I'm betting 90% on here like myself have never been cited for a game violation?  We all know how few wardens are out there. I can't help but wonder how many times this guy cheated us out of opportunities before and after h3 got cought? Yet he leads the witchhunt on a bull that the game department said was ok?

 I'm confused, what does any of that have to do with Tod Reichert killing a bull in GMU 334?........nothing but trying to deflect from the real issue!!!

 How about you finally manning up and answering the questions you've been asked, or providing links proving you already have...... :chuckle:

 My guess is you will avoid it again, prove me wrong.

In one case the party tried to make sure all was right. And that will come out in court.  In the situation I just described a real poacher was caught,  and I fact one that is very vocal for a mistake made by the game department and yet he tries to blame it on. The hunter.

Fool or as I seen another call you wise one. Might be time to slow down. On this thread alone it has been proven you don't read well. Maybe we both should leave it there before we break any rules getting into your intelligence. That would be to easy.

  :chuckle: Thanks for proving my point, you never have answered those questions and are too afraid to! :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 10, 2016, 01:59:54 AM
I feel bad and want to clear something up here (he may want to clearn that up on his record). I did accuse JDHasty of illegally using lead shot. Turns out that may not be the truth. If one does a criminal search that is what shows up on him. But the court docket shows is not reporting pheasant kills A criminal infl action as well. . One could call it poaching bird's?  I do know one thing if I had been accused of that and it wasn't true I would want my day in court. He didn't , as he went bail forfeiture.

I'm betting 90% on here like myself have never been cited for a game violation?  We all know how few wardens are out there. I can't help but wonder how many times this guy cheated us out of opportunities before and after h3 got cought? Yet he leads the witchhunt on a bull that the game department said was ok?

 I'm confused, what does any of that have to do with Tod Reichert killing a bull in GMU 334?........nothing but trying to deflect from the real issue!!!

 How about you finally manning up and answering the questions you've been asked, or providing links proving you already have...... :chuckle:

 My guess is you will avoid it again, prove me wrong.

In one case the party tried to make sure all was right. And that will come out in court.  In the situation I just described a real poacher was caught,  and I fact one that is very vocal for a mistake made by the game department and yet he tries to blame it on. The hunter.

Fool or as I seen another call you wise one. Might be time to slow down. On this thread alone it has been proven you don't read well. Maybe we both should leave it there before we break any rules getting into your intelligence. That would be to easy.

  :chuckle: Thanks for proving my point, you never have answered those questions and are too afraid to! :chuckle:

Yep been answered time and time again. Can't help it your slow. And that was putting it nicely.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: chester on June 10, 2016, 02:05:40 AM
I feel bad and want to clear something up here (he may want to clearn that up on his record). I did accuse JDHasty of illegally using lead shot. Turns out that may not be the truth. If one does a criminal search that is what shows up on him. But the court docket shows is not reporting pheasant kills A criminal infl action as well. . One could call it poaching bird's?  I do know one thing if I had been accused of that and it wasn't true I would want my day in court. He didn't , as he went bail forfeiture.

I'm betting 90% on here like myself have never been cited for a game violation?  We all know how few wardens are out there. I can't help but wonder how many times this guy cheated us out of opportunities before and after h3 got cought? Yet he leads the witchhunt on a bull that the game department said was ok?

 I'm confused, what does any of that have to do with Tod Reichert killing a bull in GMU 334?........nothing but trying to deflect from the real issue!!!

 How about you finally manning up and answering the questions you've been asked, or providing links proving you already have...... :chuckle:

 My guess is you will avoid it again, prove me wrong.

In one case the party tried to make sure all was right. And that will come out in court.  In the situation I just described a real poacher was caught,  and I fact one that is very vocal for a mistake made by the game department and yet he tries to blame it on. The hunter.

Fool or as I seen another call you wise one. Might be time to slow down. On this thread alone it has been proven you don't read well. Maybe we both should leave it there before we break any rules getting into your intelligence. That would be to easy.

  :chuckle: Thanks for proving my point, you never have answered those questions and are too afraid to! :chuckle:

Yep been answered time and time again. Can't help it your slow. And that was putting it nicely.
They've been answered by other people. You dodge every single one.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on June 10, 2016, 02:09:40 AM
I feel bad and want to clear something up here (he may want to clearn that up on his record). I did accuse JDHasty of illegally using lead shot. Turns out that may not be the truth. If one does a criminal search that is what shows up on him. But the court docket shows is not reporting pheasant kills A criminal infl action as well. . One could call it poaching bird's?  I do know one thing if I had been accused of that and it wasn't true I would want my day in court. He didn't , as he went bail forfeiture.

I'm betting 90% on here like myself have never been cited for a game violation?  We all know how few wardens are out there. I can't help but wonder how many times this guy cheated us out of opportunities before and after h3 got cought? Yet he leads the witchhunt on a bull that the game department said was ok?

 I'm confused, what does any of that have to do with Tod Reichert killing a bull in GMU 334?........nothing but trying to deflect from the real issue!!!

 How about you finally manning up and answering the questions you've been asked, or providing links proving you already have...... :chuckle:

 My guess is you will avoid it again, prove me wrong.

In one case the party tried to make sure all was right. And that will come out in court.  In the situation I just described a real poacher was caught,  and I fact one that is very vocal for a mistake made by the game department and yet he tries to blame it on. The hunter.

Fool or as I seen another call you wise one. Might be time to slow down. On this thread alone it has been proven you don't read well. Maybe we both should leave it there before we break any rules getting into your intelligence. That would be to easy.

  :chuckle: Thanks for proving my point, you never have answered those questions and are too afraid to! :chuckle:

Yep been answered time and time again. Can't help it your slow. And that was putting it nicely.

 And there you have it, Kiti is too afraid (cs) to answer the relevant questions everyone has asked, rather he tries to deflect the real issue with others irrelevant alleged violations. :chuckle:

 By the way, I may be slow but I'm literate.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 10, 2016, 02:16:33 AM
I feel bad and want to clear something up here (he may want to clearn that up on his record). I did accuse JDHasty of illegally using lead shot. Turns out that may not be the truth. If one does a criminal search that is what shows up on him. But the court docket shows is not reporting pheasant kills A criminal infl action as well. . One could call it poaching bird's?  I do know one thing if I had been accused of that and it wasn't true I would want my day in court. He didn't , as he went bail forfeiture.

I'm betting 90% on here like myself have never been cited for a game violation?  We all know how few wardens are out there. I can't help but wonder how many times this guy cheated us out of opportunities before and after h3 got cought? Yet he leads the witchhunt on a bull that the game department said was ok?

 I'm confused, what does any of that have to do with Tod Reichert killing a bull in GMU 334?........nothing but trying to deflect from the real issue!!!

 How about you finally manning up and answering the questions you've been asked, or providing links proving you already have...... :chuckle:

 My guess is you will avoid it again, prove me wrong.

In one case the party tried to make sure all was right. And that will come out in court.  In the situation I just described a real poacher was caught,  and I fact one that is very vocal for a mistake made by the game department and yet he tries to blame it on. The hunter.

Fool or as I seen another call you wise one. Might be time to slow down. On this thread alone it has been proven you don't read well. Maybe we both should leave it there before we break any rules getting into your intelligence. That would be to easy.

  :chuckle: Thanks for proving my point, you never have answered those questions and are too afraid to! :chuckle:

Yep been answered time and time again. Can't help it your slow. And that was putting it nicely.
They've been answered by other people. You dodge every single one.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Should not need to play along any more.  But what was answered by others that I didn't?  In previous threads I told the Fool Grant said it was legal to kill that bull in that unit just not with a rifle.  The slow one then tried to twist what I said and said I only talked about weapons that could be used.  I thought at the time he was just trying to twist words. I get now he really is not smart enough to comprehend what wad said.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: chester on June 10, 2016, 02:17:52 AM
Why even be in the unit in the first place ? Obviously knowing it was illegal , hence why the call was made.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 10, 2016, 02:18:41 AM
I feel bad and want to clear something up here (he may want to clearn that up on his record). I did accuse JDHasty of illegally using lead shot. Turns out that may not be the truth. If one does a criminal search that is what shows up on him. But the court docket shows is not reporting pheasant kills A criminal infl action as well. . One could call it poaching bird's?  I do know one thing if I had been accused of that and it wasn't true I would want my day in court. He didn't , as he went bail forfeiture.

I'm betting 90% on here like myself have never been cited for a game violation?  We all know how few wardens are out there. I can't help but wonder how many times this guy cheated us out of opportunities before and after h3 got cought? Yet he leads the witchhunt on a bull that the game department said was ok?

 I'm confused, what does any of that have to do with Tod Reichert killing a bull in GMU 334?........nothing but trying to deflect from the real issue!!!

 How about you finally manning up and answering the questions you've been asked, or providing links proving you already have...... :chuckle:

 My guess is you will avoid it again, prove me wrong.

In one case the party tried to make sure all was right. And that will come out in court.  In the situation I just described a real poacher was caught,  and I fact one that is very vocal for a mistake made by the game department and yet he tries to blame it on. The hunter.

Fool or as I seen another call you wise one. Might be time to slow down. On this thread alone it has been proven you don't read well. Maybe we both should leave it there before we break any rules getting into your intelligence. That would be to easy.

  :chuckle: Thanks for proving my point, you never have answered those questions and are too afraid to! :chuckle:

Yep been answered time and time again. Can't help it your slow. And that was putting it nicely.

 And there you have it, Kiti is too afraid (cs) to answer the relevant questions everyone has asked, rather he tries to deflect the real issue with others irrelevant alleged violations. :chuckle:

 By the way, I may be slow but I'm literate.

I truly feel sorry for you.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 10, 2016, 02:21:11 AM
Why even be in the unit in the first place ? Obviously knowing it was illegal , hence why the call was made.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The game department didn't seem to think there was a problem with it at the time.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: chester on June 10, 2016, 02:24:53 AM
I have a hard time believing that the call was made with no knowledge that hunting branch bulls was illegal in the unit. If you have to ask that's usually a sign it's not a good idea. The fact that the elk sat there while two phone calls were made should have set off some red flags. I've said this before but this should be a career ender for the two at Wdfw and TR if what you say is correct.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on June 10, 2016, 04:52:28 AM
I can't remember the answer to this one:  If Morgan Grant said it was okay for TR to shoot a branch bull in 334, why would wdfw investigate and recommend the county prosecute? Or did they not recommend prosecution?   

Seems like the county would be wasting time and money by prosecution if the state official did in fact give the go ahead (even though he may not have technically had the authority).
???

If you can find any evidence that WDFW recommended prosecution I would love to see it. That would be news to me.
Well, normally (as I understand it anyway), wdfw investigates, complies evidence, and then recommends the county prosecute the case if the evidence is good.  If the evidence is lacking, I would think they would not want to go thru with prosecution.

That is why it is hard to believe that Grant was specifically asked if a branched bull could be taken in 334 with that tag. If he was specifically asked that and gave the ok, then why would wdfw cite the guy and why would the county waste the time and money in prosecution?

I suppose it is possible that because the bull was named and a big celebrity that there is so much anger over the taking of the big tame bull that the county is under a lot of public pressure to do something.  But that said, I just can't see them wanting to waste the time and money unless the supposed permission is questionable. I would assume in the report that wdfw would have handed to the county would be testimony from Grant telling what was asked of him and what he told them.  If he said go ahead and shoot bullwinkle in 334 then why wouldn't the case be dropped?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: idahohuntr on June 10, 2016, 05:22:55 AM



I'm betting 90% on here like myself have never been cited for a game violation?  We all know how few wardens are out there. I can't help but wonder how many times this guy cheated us out of opportunities before and after he got cauht? Yet he leads the witchhunt on a bull that the game department said was ok?

Glass houses?

You are right...Reichert is yet again the focus of a criminal investigation for poaching a bull elk.  2nd time in the span of 8 years...makes you wonder how much poaching he really does?  We all know you don't get caught your first time...especially given how few wardens there are.  It's not at all reasonable to suggest a minor infraction 25 years ago is comparable to a guy who is repeatedly the subject of criminal investigations for poaching trophy bull elk.  Your attempts to discredit others with matters irrelevant to Reicherts criminal charges are pathetic...perhaps you could answer the questions posed to you instead of playing your games.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Reidus on June 10, 2016, 05:30:13 AM
How many people were involved with this hunt? How many were locals?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on June 10, 2016, 05:36:29 AM
I feel bad and want to clear something up here (he may want to clean that up on his record). I did accuse JDHasty of illegally using lead shot. Turns out that may not be the truth. If one does a criminal search that is what shows up on him. But the court docket shows is it pheasant kills and not reporting  A criminal violation as well. . One could call it poaching bird's?  I do know one thing if I had been accused of that and it wasn't true I would want my day in court. He didn't , as he went bail forfeiture.

I'm betting 90% on here like myself have never been cited for a game violation?  We all know how few wardens are out there. I can't help but wonder how many times this guy cheated us out of opportunities before and after he got cauht? Yet he leads the witchhunt on a bull that the game department said was ok?

Glass houses?

One pheasant, improperly marked on a punch card.  I killed a bird that a friend picked up and added to his bag after he had hit and wounded it a couple times and it was flying off the release site.

The Court docket is available for fifty-cents and ten minutes time.  You could have done that if you were interested in anything resembling the truth and not just libeling someone.

The reason that lead shot thing "pops" is because it is highlighted and emphasized that this was NOT what I had been charged with and any "due diligence" what so ever on your part would have made that apparent.  Somewhere along the line a clerk miss-typed a digit when transcribing the citation and that is where the confusion arose.  Nothing else  in the Court docket is in all caps or has asterisks added to draw attention to it.     

Here is the "money quote" cut and pasted from that document (emphasis in the original):

*****CORRECT CHARGE IS FAIL TO PROPERLY RECORED PHEASANT KILL ON RECORD CARD**************

I believe that this case may have been one of the examples that DFW used shortly thereafter when the RCW covering "Party Hunting" was amended to exclude upland game. 

That is all I have to say for a while. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Ridgeratt on June 10, 2016, 05:47:42 AM
This was in the Spokesman Review yesterday



But trophy hunting has a way of stalking the ragged edge of poaching when hunters get greedy.

In 2007, Reichert bought Washington’s first East Side Governor’s Tag and killed a trophy elk in the Umatilla National Forest. However, he was later indicted for hiring a helicopter service to spot elk for the hunt, which is unlawful in Washington and most other states. He was also charged with lying to wildlife authorities about the guiding services he hired.

Reichert’s sentence included a $5,000 fine and a two-year ban from entering a national forest.

The pretrial hearing in his current “Bullwinkle” case originally set for May 31 in Lower Kittitas District Court was postponed until June 21. It’s possible that Reichert could be using his attorneys to postpone the hearing as long as it takes for him to fill his two current trophy tags purchased in March at the tag auctions facilitated this winter by the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation.

A lot is at stake. Reichert bid $85,000 for the Pennsylvania tag and $75,000 for the Washington tag.

If he goes to court and is found guilty before those hunts, Reichert could lose his hunting privileges before those seasons start.

Either way, his auction bids will be used by RMEF and the state of Washington for wildlife conservation. Some people are okay with this system. Others aren’t so sure.

Bottom line: A wealthy man can buy just about anything he wants, but he should still have to earn our respect.

© Copyright 2016, The Spokesman-Review
 Community Guidelines
 Terms of Service
 Privacy Policy
 Copyright Policy
   

http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2016/jun/08/landers-judge-wealthy-hunters-by-what-they-give-no/









 



 

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: danderson on June 10, 2016, 07:54:44 AM
  Are the folks that have first hand knowledge of the events that took place that morning the bull was shot stating that only 2 phone calls were made just curious
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: NOCK NOCK on June 10, 2016, 08:42:31 AM
 A little song for you today....in my best singing voice;

"Ohh I wish I was a auction/raffle tag holder
That is all I truly want to be
Cause if I was a auction/raffle tag holder
Everyone would be so jealous of me

Oh I'm glad I'm not a auction/raffle tag holder
That is what I'd never want to be
Cause if I were a auction/raffle tag holder
There would soon be nothing left to hunt for me"

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on June 10, 2016, 09:01:28 AM
That was the most valuable post in the last 47 pages of this thread. :tung:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Woodchuck on June 10, 2016, 09:05:43 AM
Is witch hunting even legal in GMU 334?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: M_ray on June 10, 2016, 09:10:16 AM
There really is no other explanation for it than extreme jealousy.
Are you the judge and jury about that, or just the judge?

Nope, just pointing out the odvioise. I understand you folks from King County see things differently.

We point out the obvious too, The bull was shot in a closed unit!  ;)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 2MANY on June 10, 2016, 09:11:00 AM
I wanna shoot monster bulls and not have to lace up my boots.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on June 10, 2016, 09:11:48 AM
Is witch hunting even legal in GMU 334?
Depends on what side of the canal you are on. JK
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: NOCK NOCK on June 10, 2016, 09:21:35 AM
Kiti, I believe you were the one who's post was nuked that was comparing a members failure to purchase a new license for the new year ticket to the Bullwinkle killing, suggesting they were both mistakes.

Forgive me if I missed them, but searched through many pages and did not find a direct answer to several questions that have been asked of you. You have stated you are here to clear things up, sooooo please give me some insight on these basic questions.

1. Was TR's shooting this particular bull a mistake, or was it all legit per the WDFW phone calls?

2. I know you have stated "2 calls were made", were there only 2,or more?

3. Were these calls all out going from TR's group, or did a WDFW employee call back?

4. Were any of these calls recorded?

5. Was the bull killed the same day the calls were made?

6. Was the bull tagged at the kill site, or at the processing site? 

7. What unit was listed as the place of kill on the hunters report?

8. You and a couple others are very defensive of this situation. Are you defending TR, or just trying to CYA?


I believe that a simple yes or no, or a couple words can answer all of these, and will help you clear things up (which is why you are here correct) for a lot of folks on here.
Thank you for your time.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: NOCK NOCK on June 10, 2016, 09:23:01 AM
That was the most valuable post in the last 47 pages of this thread. :tung:

Your singing the song now huh?  :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on June 10, 2016, 09:32:57 AM
I am.


I can't get the tune out of my head.


I'm even making up new verses:

Oh, I wish I were a bullwinkle bonker
That is what I'd really like to beeeeeee-e
Cause if I were a Bullwinkle bonker
Everyone would be accusing me!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Alchase on June 10, 2016, 09:38:23 AM
Kiti, I believe you were the one who's post was nuked that was comparing a members failure to purchase a new license for the new year ticket to the Bullwinkle killing, suggesting they were both mistakes.

Forgive me if I missed them, but searched through many pages and did not find a direct answer to several questions that have been asked of you. You have stated you are here to clear things up, sooooo please give me some insight on these basic questions.

1. Was TR's shooting this particular bull a mistake, or was it all legit per the WDFW phone calls?

2. I know you have stated "2 calls were made", were there only 2,or more?

3. Were these calls all out going from TR's group, or did a WDFW employee call back?

4. Were any of these calls recorded?

5. Was the bull killed the same day the calls were made?

6. Was the bull tagged at the kill site, or at the processing site? 

7. What unit was listed as the place of kill on the hunters report?

8. You and a couple others are very defensive of this situation. Are you defending TR, or just trying to CYA?


I believe that a simple yes or no, or a couple words can answer all of these, and will help you clear things up (which is why you are here correct) for a lot of folks on here.
Thank you for your time.


I will add two more you have not responded to or said you won't answer for "clarity of coarse"

9. Were you present when the bull was killed?

10. If you were not present when this bull was killed, who is providing you your information?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on June 10, 2016, 09:44:05 AM
Questions 5,6 and 7 are the ones I am most curious about.  I have sent some pm's to previous raffle tag holders to find out how the tag and reporting work.  From what they remember you do get a tag that says raffle elk, deer, sheep or whatever you won.  They don't recall having to report the harvest like you would with your general or permit tag.  That seems odd to me and maybe it is an oversite by WDFW.  I know with my second deer and elk tags I still have to report, not sure why a raffle tag would be different but it sounds like it might be.  Maybe a call to WDFW for clarification would be good.  That is not a joke that is a serious statement by the way.

As for the timing of the phone calls I have been going round and round about that.  When were they made.  Were they made that day with the bull in the cross hairs?  Were they made the day before?  Were they made after the bull was shot and they realized they were on the wrong side of the canal?

I am not sure if Kiticaas will be answering any of these questions you have asked.  After the lock down of the thread and warnings that were issued I think everyone is treading a little lighter right now and that is probably a good thing.

I am sure during the legal proceedings it will all come out, we may just have to wait until then.

I do think that there can be some good dialogue on "what ifs" in this case, there certainly have been enough of them raised.  In reality that is all we can deal with, it's not like anything we come up with here is going to decide the final outcome of this case.

Just my  :twocents:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on June 10, 2016, 09:44:45 AM
11. When will cboom be posting again.

12. Are you in the #NeverTrump camp?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: M_ray on June 10, 2016, 09:55:16 AM
Kiti, I believe you were the one who's post was nuked that was comparing a members failure to purchase a new license for the new year ticket to the Bullwinkle killing, suggesting they were both mistakes.

Forgive me if I missed them, but searched through many pages and did not find a direct answer to several questions that have been asked of you. You have stated you are here to clear things up, sooooo please give me some insight on these basic questions.

1. Was TR's shooting this particular bull a mistake, or was it all legit per the WDFW phone calls?

2. I know you have stated "2 calls were made", were there only 2,or more?

3. Were these calls all out going from TR's group, or did a WDFW employee call back?

4. Were any of these calls recorded?

5. Was the bull killed the same day the calls were made?

6. Was the bull tagged at the kill site, or at the processing site? 

7. What unit was listed as the place of kill on the hunters report?

8. You and a couple others are very defensive of this situation. Are you defending TR, or just trying to CYA?


I believe that a simple yes or no, or a couple words can answer all of these, and will help you clear things up (which is why you are here correct) for a lot of folks on here.
Thank you for your time.

You forgot the other question that was asked that Kiti never answered ...Was the question when calling? (the real #11 & 12)

11 "What weapon can I use in 334?"
                or
12"Can I shoot this bull in 334?"

I'd bet it's the first which makes perfect sense why the County would move forward and file charges. A clear attempt to cast a grey area over the use of the tag considering there is a Master Hunter cow hunt in there at that time.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: REHJWA on June 10, 2016, 10:31:14 AM
My question is why can a person charged with a wildlife violation continue to hunt until the situation is resolved?

I understand innocent until proven guilty, however once a charge has been filed why would the PRIVILEGE to continue to hunt not be suspended until the situation is resolved?

If there is enough evidence to file charges, shouldn't there be enough to suspend privileges?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bearpaw on June 10, 2016, 10:34:37 AM
My question is why can a person charged with a wildlife violation continue to hunt until the situation is resolved?

I understand innocent until proven guilty, however once a charge has been filed why would the PRIVILEGE to continue to hunt not be suspended until the situation is resolved?

If there is enough evidence to file charges, shouldn't there be enough to suspend privileges?

Because you are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty. How can you lose your hunting rights until you are proven guilty. Try to look at it in other perspectives and you will understand.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JimmyHoffa on June 10, 2016, 10:41:40 AM
My question is why can a person charged with a wildlife violation continue to hunt until the situation is resolved?

I understand innocent until proven guilty, however once a charge has been filed why would the PRIVILEGE to continue to hunt not be suspended until the situation is resolved?

If there is enough evidence to file charges, shouldn't there be enough to suspend privileges?

Because you are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty. How can you lose your hunting rights until you are proven guilty. Try to look at it in other perspectives and you will understand.
But in many cases, your 2nd amendment rights are suspended until after being found not guilty.  For example a woman can claim domestic violence and the police will come take all the firearms and he can't purchase anything until after a trial clears him.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: REHJWA on June 10, 2016, 10:59:58 AM
My question is why can a person charged with a wildlife violation continue to hunt until the situation is resolved?

I understand innocent until proven guilty, however once a charge has been filed why would the PRIVILEGE to continue to hunt not be suspended until the situation is resolved?

If there is enough evidence to file charges, shouldn't there be enough to suspend privileges?

Because you are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty. How can you lose your hunting rights until you are proven guilty. Try to look at it in other perspectives and you will understand.

Unless we get the state to pass an amendment to the constitution hunting is a privilege not a right.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bob33 on June 10, 2016, 11:03:05 AM
My question is why can a person charged with a wildlife violation continue to hunt until the situation is resolved?

I understand innocent until proven guilty, however once a charge has been filed why would the PRIVILEGE to continue to hunt not be suspended until the situation is resolved?

If there is enough evidence to file charges, shouldn't there be enough to suspend privileges?

Because you are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty. How can you lose your hunting rights until you are proven guilty. Try to look at it in other perspectives and you will understand.
I agree with Dale. Until he is legally found guilty I don't believe he should lose hunting privileges.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on June 10, 2016, 11:12:26 AM
My question is why can a person charged with a wildlife violation continue to hunt until the situation is resolved?

I understand innocent until proven guilty, however once a charge has been filed why would the PRIVILEGE to continue to hunt not be suspended until the situation is resolved?

If there is enough evidence to file charges, shouldn't there be enough to suspend privileges?

Because you are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty. How can you lose your hunting rights until you are proven guilty. Try to look at it in other perspectives and you will understand.
I agree with Dale. Until he is legally found guilty I don't believe he should lose hunting privileges.
:yeah:
Especially in this case, the water is so muddy who knows what really happened?  He has the right to defend himself from the charges and that takes time.  He shouldn't be penalized for trying to defend himself.

The domestic violence charge is a completely different thing altogether, you are talking about personal safety of another human being potentially being at risk.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JimmyHoffa on June 10, 2016, 11:15:49 AM
No, it's still punishment before any verdict.  If personal safety is really an issue, the person should be held in jail.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on June 10, 2016, 11:24:53 AM
No, it's still punishment before any verdict.  If personal safety is really an issue, the person should be held in jail.
Okay.  I am thinking taking the guns away is cheaper than putting them in jail, in both cases they don't have access to the firearms.  In my case they can still injure the person with a  knife, hatchet, baseball bat or whatever.  I like your solution better lock them up then everyone is safer.  It would just suck to get locked up because somebody said you assaulted them.  I personally would rather just loose my guns for a while as I fought through the allegations.  Sounds like you think we should lock them up as soon as an allegation is made. We will have to agree to disagree.

This has got the thread totally off track though. If I were accused I wouldn't want my right to hunt taken away, I would want my day in court first.

There would be nothing to stop someone who was "jealous" of making an accusation every year to keep me from hunting if that were the case.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 2MANY on June 10, 2016, 11:36:57 AM
A little song for you today....in my best singing voice;

"Ohh I wish I was a auction/raffle tag holder
That is all I truly want to be
Cause if I was a auction/raffle tag holder
Everyone would be so jealous of me

Oh I'm glad I'm not a auction/raffle tag holder
That is what I'd never want to be
Cause if I were a auction/raffle tag holder
There would soon be nothing left to hunt for me"


Question #13
Why did Oscar Mayer have so many wieners?

Question #14
What bathroom did he use?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bearpaw on June 10, 2016, 11:42:27 AM
My question is why can a person charged with a wildlife violation continue to hunt until the situation is resolved?

I understand innocent until proven guilty, however once a charge has been filed why would the PRIVILEGE to continue to hunt not be suspended until the situation is resolved?

If there is enough evidence to file charges, shouldn't there be enough to suspend privileges?

Because you are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty. How can you lose your hunting rights until you are proven guilty. Try to look at it in other perspectives and you will understand.
But in many cases, your 2nd amendment rights are suspended until after being found not guilty.  For example a woman can claim domestic violence and the police will come take all the firearms and he can't purchase anything until after a trial clears him.

I don't agree with the current system involving domestic violence because some people will falsely claim DV just to get at the person they are accusing. I'm not sure what the best answer is because in real cases of DV innocent abused people need protection.  :dunno:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JimmyHoffa on June 10, 2016, 11:44:39 AM
No, it's still punishment before any verdict.  If personal safety is really an issue, the person should be held in jail.
Okay.  I am thinking taking the guns away is cheaper than putting them in jail, in both cases they don't have access to the firearms.  In my case they can still injure the person with a  knife, hatchet, baseball bat or whatever.  I like your solution better lock them up then everyone is safer.  It would just suck to get locked up because somebody said you assaulted them.  I personally would rather just loose my guns for a while as I fought through the allegations.  Sounds like you think we should lock them up as soon as an allegation is made. We will have to agree to disagree.

This has got the thread totally off track though. If I were accused I wouldn't want my right to hunt taken away, I would want my day in court first.

There would be nothing to stop someone who was "jealous" of making an accusation every year to keep me from hunting if that were the case.
I agree, you are presumed innocent.  TR should be allowed to hunt during this time period.  I was just pointing out to bearpaw, that there are cases where you lose rights (not privileges) during the court phase.  Not to get off track too much, but most of the people awaiting trial for some crime of violence that are free on bail were determined to not be a threat...yet still lose (known) guns.  Can easily just buy one from a gang banger to replace what the court took.  Just seems wonky.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on June 10, 2016, 11:49:22 AM
No, it's still punishment before any verdict.  If personal safety is really an issue, the person should be held in jail.
Okay.  I am thinking taking the guns away is cheaper than putting them in jail, in both cases they don't have access to the firearms.  In my case they can still injure the person with a  knife, hatchet, baseball bat or whatever.  I like your solution better lock them up then everyone is safer.  It would just suck to get locked up because somebody said you assaulted them.  I personally would rather just loose my guns for a while as I fought through the allegations.  Sounds like you think we should lock them up as soon as an allegation is made. We will have to agree to disagree.

This has got the thread totally off track though. If I were accused I wouldn't want my right to hunt taken away, I would want my day in court first.

There would be nothing to stop someone who was "jealous" of making an accusation every year to keep me from hunting if that were the case.
I agree, you are presumed innocent.  TR should be allowed to hunt during this time period.  I was just pointing out to bearpaw, that there are cases where you lose rights (not privileges) during the court phase.  Not to get off track too much, but most of the people awaiting trial for some crime of violence that are free on bail were determined to not be a threat...yet still lose (known) guns.  Can easily just buy one from a gang banger to replace what the court took.  Just seems wonky.
:tup:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: idahohuntr on June 10, 2016, 01:40:04 PM
There would be nothing to stop someone who was "jealous" of making an accusation every year to keep me from hunting if that were the case.
There is a difference between someone accusing you...he said/she said stuff...and a Prosecutor filing criminal charges.  In this specific case, and many big game poaching cases, I would likely support suspension of hunting privileges when criminal charges are filed.  I bet Reichert wouldn't be filing all these extensions and trying to drag this out for 5 years like he did in his last criminal poaching case if all hunting privileges were suspended pending the outcome of his charges.  He has a right to a speedy trial...if he's innocent and wants his hunting privleges restored...then he should get on the ball.  If he wants to waive that right so he can milk the system and drive up costs to taxpayers...that's his choice...but he shouldn't be allowed to do it while maintaining hunting privileges. :twocents:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bearpaw on June 10, 2016, 01:51:58 PM
There would be nothing to stop someone who was "jealous" of making an accusation every year to keep me from hunting if that were the case.
There is a difference between someone accusing you...he said/she said stuff...and a Prosecutor filing criminal charges.  In this specific case, and many big game poaching cases, I would likely support suspension of hunting privileges when criminal charges are filed.  I bet Reichert wouldn't be filing all these extensions and trying to drag this out for 5 years like he did in his last criminal poaching case if all hunting privileges were suspended pending the outcome of his charges.  He has a right to a speedy trial...if he's innocent and wants his hunting privleges restored...then he should get on the ball.  If he wants to waive that right so he can milk the system and drive up costs to taxpayers...that's his choice...but he shouldn't be allowed to do it while maintaining hunting privileges. :twocents:

If his story is true that WDFW gave him permission I've got a Benjamin that says the court finds him innocent. You are saying he should lose his privileges in the mean time? Sorry but that doesn't fly very well!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on June 10, 2016, 01:56:13 PM
I have to agree with Bpaw on this one. People should not be losing rights while waiting for their day in court. I don't like how they can drag things out but I don't think we really want potentially innocent people losing rights.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bearpaw on June 10, 2016, 01:58:51 PM
Seems like a very slippery slope to me to start handing out punishment before guilt is known!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kentrek on June 10, 2016, 02:07:28 PM
Seems like a very slippery slope to me to start handing out punishment before guilt is known!

 :yeah: we have a system for a reason
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: blackveltbowhunter on June 10, 2016, 02:12:29 PM
 :yeah:  If anything this case and discussion has shown the flaws and shortcoming within the system, and hopefully ideas on how to avoid them.  :tup:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on June 10, 2016, 02:23:45 PM
 :yeah:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on June 10, 2016, 02:25:52 PM
I bet TR wishes he had the permission in writing. If he really did get permission to shoot a branched bull in 334 then it is bs that he was cited (even if shooting the bull might be ethically wrong in some people's minds). It may be a good lesson; hopefully in the future if a guy gets the okay from a wdfw employee for something, a followup text or email should be requested.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bearpaw on June 10, 2016, 02:31:57 PM
I bet TR wishes he had the permission in writing. If he really did get permission to shoot a branched bull in 334 then it is bs that he was cited (even if shooting the bull might be ethically wrong in some people's minds). It may be a good lesson; hopefully in the future if a guy gets the okay from a wdfw employee for something, a followup text or email should be requested.

 :yeah: I would think that if a WDFW employee told him he could shoot they would be honest about it. But, this topic has made me rethink getting written clarification when I talk to F&G personnel in any state.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bobcat on June 10, 2016, 02:40:09 PM
Yeah especially if it's permission to violate the law and not just clarification of the law.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bearpaw on June 10, 2016, 02:45:26 PM
Yeah especially if it's permission to violate the law and not just clarification of the law.

I would certainly like to hear the reasoning why permission to shoot the bull was granted?  :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on June 10, 2016, 02:58:27 PM
Yeah especially if it's permission to violate the law and not just clarification of the law.

I would certainly like to hear the reasoning why permission to shoot the bull was granted?  :chuckle:
I am not so sure I want to hear the reason.  My dad used to say" don't ask a question that you are not ready for the worst possible answer to."  I am scared that what I hear when the dust settles might make me want to  :puke:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: idahohuntr on June 10, 2016, 03:22:04 PM
There would be nothing to stop someone who was "jealous" of making an accusation every year to keep me from hunting if that were the case.
There is a difference between someone accusing you...he said/she said stuff...and a Prosecutor filing criminal charges.  In this specific case, and many big game poaching cases, I would likely support suspension of hunting privileges when criminal charges are filed.  I bet Reichert wouldn't be filing all these extensions and trying to drag this out for 5 years like he did in his last criminal poaching case if all hunting privileges were suspended pending the outcome of his charges.  He has a right to a speedy trial...if he's innocent and wants his hunting privleges restored...then he should get on the ball.  If he wants to waive that right so he can milk the system and drive up costs to taxpayers...that's his choice...but he shouldn't be allowed to do it while maintaining hunting privileges. :twocents:

If his story is true that WDFW gave him permission I've got a Benjamin that says the court finds him innocent. You are saying he should lose his privileges in the mean time? Sorry but that doesn't fly very well!
Happens all day long with driving privileges...licenses are suspended even before any criminal charges are filed. He has the right to a speedy trial.  If he's innocent he can move quickly to his acquittal.

I agree with you - if Morgan Grant gave clear permission for him to shoot this bull in GMU 334, a jury will not convict him.  If WDFW/Grant confirms this defense that the officer gave clear permission, I fully support the immediate termination of Morgan Grant and a recall vote for the County Prosecutor for wasting resources.  If WDFW disputes the call or pertinent details, given Reicherts previous convictions for lying, then I am inclined to believe the State and hope Reichert is punished.

Given most of us were not there, and those that were are likely biased, we are all left to our own life experiences to weigh the various stories, theories, defenses, and accounts of the event which have been published.  I don't see a Prosecutor in a million years filing charges if the States lead officer is going to testify in support of the defense that he gave clear permission to shoot that bull in that location. I will be the first to say the State and County really, really screwed up if this phone call went down as some on here are suggesting. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bearpaw on June 10, 2016, 03:41:33 PM
There would be nothing to stop someone who was "jealous" of making an accusation every year to keep me from hunting if that were the case.
There is a difference between someone accusing you...he said/she said stuff...and a Prosecutor filing criminal charges.  In this specific case, and many big game poaching cases, I would likely support suspension of hunting privileges when criminal charges are filed.  I bet Reichert wouldn't be filing all these extensions and trying to drag this out for 5 years like he did in his last criminal poaching case if all hunting privileges were suspended pending the outcome of his charges.  He has a right to a speedy trial...if he's innocent and wants his hunting privleges restored...then he should get on the ball.  If he wants to waive that right so he can milk the system and drive up costs to taxpayers...that's his choice...but he shouldn't be allowed to do it while maintaining hunting privileges. :twocents:

If his story is true that WDFW gave him permission I've got a Benjamin that says the court finds him innocent. You are saying he should lose his privileges in the mean time? Sorry but that doesn't fly very well!
Happens all day long with driving privileges...licenses are suspended even before any criminal charges are filed. He has the right to a speedy trial.  If he's innocent he can move quickly to his acquittal.

I agree with you - if Morgan Grant gave clear permission for him to shoot this bull in GMU 334, a jury will not convict him.  If WDFW/Grant confirms this defense that the officer gave clear permission, I fully support the immediate termination of Morgan Grant and a recall vote for the County Prosecutor for wasting resources.  If WDFW disputes the call or pertinent details, given Reicherts previous convictions for lying, then I am inclined to believe the State and hope Reichert is punished.

Given most of us were not there, and those that were are likely biased, we are all left to our own life experiences to weigh the various stories, theories, defenses, and accounts of the event which have been published.  I don't see a Prosecutor in a million years filing charges if the States lead officer is going to testify in support of the defense that he gave clear permission to shoot that bull in that location. I will be the first to say the State and County really, really screwed up if this phone call went down as some on here are suggesting.

I think it's the county prosecuting, from pressure by locals according to the posts I've read if that's true, who knows. Maybe the county doesn't even know permission was "as claimed" granted by WDFW?

With driving offenses are you talking about DWI? I know that if you are drunk you go to jail. But most driving offenses do not result in loss of license or other punishment before going to court!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: REHJWA on June 10, 2016, 04:15:03 PM
My question is why can a person charged with a wildlife violation continue to hunt until the situation is resolved?

I understand innocent until proven guilty, however once a charge has been filed why would the PRIVILEGE to continue to hunt not be suspended until the situation is resolved?

If there is enough evidence to file charges, shouldn't there be enough to suspend privileges?

Because you are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty. How can you lose your hunting rights until you are proven guilty. Try to look at it in other perspectives and you will understand.
I agree with Dale. Until he is legally found guilty I don't believe he should lose hunting privileges.
I will agree to disagree... :sry:

IF, and I do believe in our legal system, the prosecution has substantial evidence to proceed with filing charges I believe there is justification to suspend hunting privileges.

As I stated I do believe innocent until proven guilty and in no way am I proposing punishment before a verdict.
 
However I believe a situation like this should be resolved before anyone could hunt again. It is like rewarding bad behavior. If you know your going to be held accountable your less likely to push the limit....

When I have been accused of wrong doing I can't wait to clear things up. 1. If I'm wrong I want to learn from it and 2. If I'm right I can sleep better knowing I was cleared.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: HntnFsh on June 10, 2016, 04:20:31 PM
I bet TR wishes he had the permission in writing. If he really did get permission to shoot a branched bull in 334 then it is bs that he was cited (even if shooting the bull might be ethically wrong in some people's minds). It may be a good lesson; hopefully in the future if a guy gets the okay from a wdfw employee for something, a followup text or email should be requested.

Kit hunter says that Grant was told that he was on speaker phone and others were listening. As I said before. This sounds really fishy to me! But that's just me. But if that's the case. And he was given permission over the phone. With more than 1 witness. I think he has all the proof of permission he needs! I also think a judge or jury will let him off if that's the case. I think they went in full well knowing this bull was strictly off limits. May have went on a fishing trip. May have hooked a big one. Time will tell.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: HntnFsh on June 10, 2016, 04:24:53 PM
I also think the prosecutor already knows if Grant gave permission. And has weighed that aspect in regards as to whether to proceed with the case.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: full choke on June 10, 2016, 05:23:23 PM
Maybe this question has been asked and I missed it:
If he was granted permission by an employee of WDFW (who actually had the authority to do so), and everything is as locked up and on the up-n-up as some people are claiming, why wouldn't he be pushing for a speedy trial? Get this whole mess behind him, clear his name? Why would he be delaying court dates and stalling the process? Just curious.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bobcat on June 10, 2016, 05:34:46 PM
Great question.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: HntnFsh on June 10, 2016, 07:37:51 PM
Maybe this question has been asked and I missed it:
If he was granted permission by an employee of WDFW (who actually had the authority to do so), and everything is as locked up and on the up-n-up as some people are claiming, why wouldn't he be pushing for a speedy trial? Get this whole mess behind him, clear his name? Why would he be delaying court dates and stalling the process? Just curious.

My understanding is that there is no such person in WDFW.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: stew pidasso on June 10, 2016, 08:33:30 PM
I think the question to wfdw was, can we shoot a bull in 334 with a muzzleloader? Wfdw says sure thinking they ment spike bull. Permission granted
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Alchase on June 10, 2016, 08:38:44 PM
I am curious why there was no forfeiture of vehicles and firearms in this case?
RCW 77.15.070
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: dscubame on June 10, 2016, 08:39:35 PM
I think the question to wfdw was, can we shoot a bull in 334 with a muzzleloader? Wfdw says sure thinking they ment spike bull. Permission granted

Why he ask that question when the answer to his intended question would be and is clearly in the regs?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bullkllr on June 10, 2016, 08:43:49 PM
I think the question to wfdw was, can we shoot a bull in 334 with a muzzleloader? Wfdw says sure thinking they ment spike bull. Permission granted

Why he ask that question when the answer to his intended question would be and is clearly in the regs?

Well, yeah; and that right there is a primary reason this thread is pushing 50 pages.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bobcat on June 10, 2016, 10:31:11 PM
GMU 334 wouldn't be open even for spike bull elk with the raffle tag.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Reidus on June 11, 2016, 07:17:58 AM
 :yeah:.

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Reidus on June 11, 2016, 07:23:19 AM
With all the people involved in this hunt, I can't believe that none of them would have missed this in the regs. Maybe they played dumb when the question came up, hoping for a big payday. Big horns and large sums of money has been known to have effect on people's thinking ability.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jkthomps on June 11, 2016, 01:23:47 PM
(http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160611/1cdffc77e4d43735b20f384ef84b9db5.jpg)

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 12, 2016, 01:03:09 AM
Kiti, I believe you were the one who's post was nuked that was comparing a members failure to purchase a new license for the new year ticket to the Bullwinkle killing, suggesting they were both mistakes.

Forgive me if I missed them, but searched through many pages and did not find a direct answer to several questions that have been asked of you. You have stated you are here to clear things up, sooooo please give me some insight on these basic questions.

1. Was TR's shooting this particular bull a mistake, or was it all legit per the WDFW phone calls?

2. I know you have stated "2 calls were made", were there only 2,or more?

3. Were these calls all out going from TR's group, or did a WDFW employee call back?

4. Were any of these calls recorded?

5. Was the bull killed the same day the calls were made?

6. Was the bull tagged at the kill site, or at the processing site? 

7. What unit was listed as the place of kill on the hunters report?

8. You and a couple others are very defensive of this situation. Are you defending TR, or just trying to CYA?


I believe that a simple yes or no, or a couple words can answer all of these, and will help you clear things up (which is why you are here correct) for a lot of folks on here.
Thank you for your time.

#1. Mistake on WDFW part. When the calls were made WDFW gave the ok after looking into it.

#2. Was clear before on that. How many would it take to be ok in your mind. One or five I think personally shold be enough when they come up with a crystal clear answer?

#3 both

#4  no,  but witnessed by several.

#5  no a day later.

#6 was moved to  3 dressed per request of the landowner that didn't want a gut pile in his field.

#7 not sure. Don't know? 

Go ahead and ask #8, 9 and 10.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 12, 2016, 01:24:54 AM
I also think the prosecutor already knows if Grant gave permission. And has weighed that aspect in regards as to whether to proceed with the case.

Time will tell?  Easy to prosecute.  Especially when when a small few have the phone ringing off the hook. Makes people happy. Think it will turn out to be a mistake for the county, I'm sure they figured they could get a deal done that made both sides look ok. Don't think that's going to happen in this case. No point walking away with even a hint of guilt when you should be 100% innocent in the situation.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 12, 2016, 02:02:18 AM
My question is why can a person charged with a wildlife violation continue to hunt until the situation is resolved?

I understand innocent until proven guilty, however once a charge has been filed why would the PRIVILEGE to continue to hunt not be suspended until the situation is resolved?

If there is enough evidence to file charges, shouldn't there be enough to suspend privileges?

Because you are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty. How can you lose your hunting rights until you are proven guilty. Try to look at it in other perspectives and you will understand.
I agree with Dale. Until he is legally found guilty I don't believe he should lose hunting privileges.
:yeah:
Especially in this case, the water is so muddy who knows what really happened?  He has the right to defend himself from the charges and that takes time.  He shouldn't be penalized for trying to defend himself.

The domestic violence charge is a completely different thing altogether, you are talking about personal safety of another human being potentially being at risk.

Be careful what you say on here Rainier10. Many have made thier minds up on a situation they don't know much about. Would hate to see you get labeled on here just because you are keeping an open mind.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 12, 2016, 02:10:48 AM
My question is why can a person charged with a wildlife violation continue to hunt until the situation is resolved?

I understand innocent until proven guilty, however once a charge has been filed why would the PRIVILEGE to continue to hunt not be suspended until the situation is resolved?

If there is enough evidence to file charges, shouldn't there be enough to suspend privileges?

Because you are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty. How can you lose your hunting rights until you are proven guilty. Try to look at it in other perspectives and you will understand.
But in many cases, your 2nd amendment rights are suspended until after being found not guilty.  For example a woman can claim domestic violence and the police will come take all the firearms and he can't purchase anything until after a trial clears him.

I don't agree with the current system involving domestic violence because some people will falsely claim DV just to get at the person they are accusing. I'm not sure what the best answer is because in real cases of DV innocent abused people need protection.  :dunno:

And sadly far to often don't get that protection when they need it. As the guy or gal that got into an argument with thier spouse can't legality touch there firearms. I don't know the answer either?  Do know what we have now is not a solution.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: NOCK NOCK on June 12, 2016, 07:09:05 AM
Kiti, I believe you were the one who's post was nuked that was comparing a members failure to purchase a new license for the new year ticket to the Bullwinkle killing, suggesting they were both mistakes.

Forgive me if I missed them, but searched through many pages and did not find a direct answer to several questions that have been asked of you. You have stated you are here to clear things up, sooooo please give me some insight on these basic questions.

1. Was TR's shooting this particular bull a mistake, or was it all legit per the WDFW phone calls?

2. I know you have stated "2 calls were made", were there only 2,or more?

3. Were these calls all out going from TR's group, or did a WDFW employee call back?

4. Were any of these calls recorded?

5. Was the bull killed the same day the calls were made?

6. Was the bull tagged at the kill site, or at the processing site? 

7. What unit was listed as the place of kill on the hunters report?

8. You and a couple others are very defensive of this situation. Are you defending TR, or just trying to CYA?


I believe that a simple yes or no, or a couple words can answer all of these, and will help you clear things up (which is why you are here correct) for a lot of folks on here.
Thank you for your time.

#1. Mistake on WDFW part. When the calls were made WDFW gave the ok after looking into it.

#2. Was clear before on that. How many would it take to be ok in your mind. One or five I think personally shold be enough when they come up with a crystal clear answer?

#3 both

#4  no,  but witnessed by several.

#5  no a day later.

#6 was moved to  3 dressed per request of the landowner that didn't want a gut pile in his field.

#7 not sure. Don't know? 

Go ahead and ask #8, 9 and 10.


Kiti,
Thank you very much for answering the questions. I get the answer of #6, but, it does not answer the original question of where the bull was tagged :dunno:

Forgive me but I do not understand your reply of "Go ahead and ask #8, 9, 10"  :dunno:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on June 12, 2016, 07:41:20 AM
I also think the prosecutor already knows if Grant gave permission. And has weighed that aspect in regards as to whether to proceed with the case.

Time will tell?  Easy to prosecute.  Especially when when a small few have the phone ringing off the hook. Makes people happy. Think it will turn out to be a mistake for the county, I'm sure they figured they could get a deal done that made both sides look ok. Don't think that's going to happen in this case. No point walking away with even a hint of guilt when you should be 100% innocent in the situation.

Its not about making both sides look ok, its about the wrong thing was done, and know the right thing needs to be done according to the laws that all hunters must abide by or pay the consequences!  :twocents:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on June 12, 2016, 07:52:40 AM
NOT going through 48 pages to find out.......has he been charged?  (please)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on June 12, 2016, 07:54:43 AM
NOT going through 48 pages to find out.......has he been charged?  (please)

yes he has.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on June 12, 2016, 07:56:29 AM
NOT going through 48 pages to find out.......has he been charged?  (please)

yes he has.

Thank you
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: h20hunter on June 12, 2016, 07:56:54 AM
My understanding  is charges have been filed and the first court date has been postponed once for .....cough cough .......health reasons. My assumption ,  and this is only an opinion, is that was done to minimize  the possibility  of losing the chance to fill tags this year that he has already spent many thousands of dollars on.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: greenhead_killer on June 12, 2016, 08:45:00 AM
Sort of a side question but I think was asked a few pages ago. Why did he not lose truck/rifle/elk head/etc....didn't rt lose everything when he was accused of poaching a few years ago?? And that was just on a two pt md! Not even for what the state claims as a trophy! Just curious if this were a serious offense why the same isn't being done with this current case? (Rt was found NOT GUILTY to any new readers btw)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bearpaw on June 12, 2016, 08:57:03 AM
Sort of a side question but I think was asked a few pages ago. Why did he not lose truck/rifle/elk head/etc....didn't rt lose everything when he was accused of poaching a few years ago?? And that was just on a two pt md! Not even for what the state claims as a trophy! Just curious if this were a serious offense why the same isn't being done with this current case? (Rt was found NOT GUILTY to any new readers btw)

That's a very good point. It seems I heard that if you voluntarily give them your weapon they take it, but they can't take if you say no. Is that correct?
Another question, I've heard of wardens entering a home and taking all sorts of things, how does that work?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on June 12, 2016, 09:01:26 AM
This might clarify a little.  http://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=77.15.070
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on June 12, 2016, 09:10:45 AM
This is the line that resonates with me, only speaking from opinion.
"However, fish and wildlife officers or ex officio fish and wildlife officers may not seize any item or article, other than for evidence, if under the circumstances, it is reasonable to conclude that the violation was inadvertent."
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Colville on June 12, 2016, 09:31:02 AM
They also were not at the scene. How would the know the rifle and truck used. They would be relying on witness statements. If arrested at the scene, confiscation may have happened.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: greenhead_killer on June 12, 2016, 10:12:53 AM
And part two of the question, would the 'guides' be held under these same laws if the charges are ruled as guilty verdict? They would essentially be accomplices to this whole event so I'd assume (?) that they would be dealt with accordingly as well or is this restricted solely to TR? Would they also have to potentially forfeit anything that was used for the taking or just a fine? Thanks for the link to rcws.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: NOCK NOCK on June 12, 2016, 10:52:16 AM
IMO,  :yeah: could be why a couple new posters to this site/thread specifically are very adamant about this being a not guilty outcome.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bobcat on June 12, 2016, 11:21:39 AM
True. Isn't it normally the case that if one person helps another person poach, that both people are equally accountable, regardless of who pulled the trigger?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: greenhead_killer on June 12, 2016, 02:46:42 PM
@ nock nock, that's what I have been thinking too. Why a few new members have been so adamant to set up a smoke and mirrors campaign. I've been following this thing from the beginning and just sat and observed. If people are really the way they portray themselves from behind a keyboard, I can tell you who I would enjoy being around and who I wouldn't give a min of my time to. Now it's just a waiting game.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JJB11B on June 12, 2016, 03:44:45 PM
IMO,  :yeah: could be why a couple new posters to this site/thread specifically are very adamant about this being a not guilty outcome.
I am more worried about whether I should buy more worms before I head to Moses Lake on Wednesday.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bigtex on June 12, 2016, 04:16:40 PM
Sort of a side question but I think was asked a few pages ago. Why did he not lose truck/rifle/elk head/etc....didn't rt lose everything when he was accused of poaching a few years ago?? And that was just on a two pt md! Not even for what the state claims as a trophy! Just curious if this were a serious offense why the same isn't being done with this current case? (Rt was found NOT GUILTY to any new readers btw)
That's a very good point. It seems I heard that if you voluntarily give them your weapon they take it, but they can't take if you say no. Is that correct?
Another question, I've heard of wardens entering a home and taking all sorts of things, how does that work?
#1 Officers (any LEO enforcing F&W laws not just WDFW) can seize it under their authority, you can't say "no"
#2 Pursuant to a search warrant. Or if the person allows them to.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: M_ray on June 12, 2016, 05:29:07 PM
Kiti, You selectively answer only the questions you want and most often with answers that don't even match the question???

 For instance your answer to #6 does not answer the question directly. We all know it was moved, and I've yet to hear anyone dispute the fact that we all know a request to gut somewhere else by a landowner is a reasonable one. Now answer the real question...

6. Was the bull tagged at the kill site, or at the processing site?      :dunno:

This isnt an answer either???

Why even be in the unit in the first place ? Obviously knowing it was illegal , hence why the call was made.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The game department didn't seem to think there was a problem with it at the time.

Of coarse the game dept isnt going to have a problem with it, hell I could call them and tell them I'm in the 334 and looking at elk in Dec. they would probably say "Ok good for you"  Because there is a Master Hunter cow hunt going on!!!  But if I tell them I have a muzzy and I'm standing 25yrds from a Branch bull that is laying in a field and not even afraid of me and I'm about to shoot it I think they might have a different answer.  :o There is a big difference between the dept being ok with you being there AND Shooting a bull there. This doesn't tell us that the Dept was ok with TR shooting a bull if the right question was asked for all the Dept officials know they were there to shoot a cow with a master hunter tag. Which br ings up another question I'd like to know ...

"Does TR posses a master hunter certificate?"

The problem that people have with the defense of your friend being in the 334 is that this is not a new rule, it's been around for all of the other Auction tags TR has had over the years. If TR is as smart as the defenders of him say then I'm sure he would have done what ALL of us do as soon as we draw a good tag. We go over the boundaries of that tag to make sure we know where we can scout, TR is 74 and has been doing this for a lifetime so its pretty simple and I'm sure something that he has done and read a thousand times.

I can agree with you that there CAN be some confusing explanations in the game pamphlet but you insult everyone's intelligence on here when you try and say that the outline of this explanation is too hard to comprehend. It is one of the easiest description's in the pamphlet to understand, really simple and straightforward ... 334 is not open to the taking of branch bulls with any tag so?

"Why was he in there in the first place?"

And finally you never answered this question ...

What Was the question when calling?

"What weapon can I use in 334?"
                or
"Can I shoot this bull in 334?"

Everyone here can agree that the first question can fall within the lines of a grey area or a way around the law. But in no way does it mean that the person asking has full WDFW approval to shoot a branch bull if given the go ahead to use a muzzy.

If you want to clear things up as you first stated then answers to these will go far in achieving your initial goal. And I'm ok with "I don't know" cause I think everyone is tired of the smoke and mirrors trick.  :hello:




 

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Alchase on June 12, 2016, 05:31:23 PM
IMO,  :yeah: could be why a couple new posters to this site/thread specifically are very adamant about this being a not guilty outcome.

 This is so blatantly obvious
I believe this is probably the most truthful post in the last 49 pages, Besides JD Hasty's play by play before the threats started.
 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bearpaw on June 12, 2016, 05:34:11 PM
Sort of a side question but I think was asked a few pages ago. Why did he not lose truck/rifle/elk head/etc....didn't rt lose everything when he was accused of poaching a few years ago?? And that was just on a two pt md! Not even for what the state claims as a trophy! Just curious if this were a serious offense why the same isn't being done with this current case? (Rt was found NOT GUILTY to any new readers btw)
That's a very good point. It seems I heard that if you voluntarily give them your weapon they take it, but they can't take if you say no. Is that correct?
Another question, I've heard of wardens entering a home and taking all sorts of things, how does that work?
#1 Officers (any LEO enforcing F&W laws not just WDFW) can seize it under their authority, you can't say "no"
#2 Pursuant to a search warrant. Or if the person allows them to.

Thanks for clarification.

So if you are found innocent does all your stuff have to be returned?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: STIKNSTRINGBOW on June 12, 2016, 05:37:06 PM
IMO,  :yeah: could be why a couple new posters to this site/thread specifically are very adamant about this being a not guilty outcome.
I was kind of curious about that also...
The conversation that I have been eavesdropping (this one) really reminded me of a couple of "guides" that I have met that really take advantage of the fact that WA does not require a guides license unless it is fishing.
All you need is a few good pictures, then use the internet to set up your "business"
Then hide behind accusations of slander to protect your reputation when you are accused of anything.
Ego before ethics...
 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Alchase on June 12, 2016, 05:39:34 PM
Sort of a side question but I think was asked a few pages ago. Why did he not lose truck/rifle/elk head/etc....didn't rt lose everything when he was accused of poaching a few years ago?? And that was just on a two pt md! Not even for what the state claims as a trophy! Just curious if this were a serious offense why the same isn't being done with this current case? (Rt was found NOT GUILTY to any new readers btw)
That's a very good point. It seems I heard that if you voluntarily give them your weapon they take it, but they can't take if you say no. Is that correct?
Another question, I've heard of wardens entering a home and taking all sorts of things, how does that work?
#1 Officers (any LEO enforcing F&W laws not just WDFW) can seize it under their authority, you can't say "no"
#2 Pursuant to a search warrant. Or if the person allows them to.

Civil forteiture


RCW 77.15.070
Civil forfeiture of property used for violation of chapter.
(1) Fish and wildlife officers and ex officio fish and wildlife officers may seize without warrant boats, airplanes, vehicles, motorized implements, conveyances, gear, appliances, or other articles they have probable cause to believe have been held with intent to violate or used in violation of this title or rule of the commission or director. However, fish and wildlife officers or ex officio fish and wildlife officers may not seize any item or article, other than for evidence, if under the circumstances, it is reasonable to conclude that the violation was inadvertent. The property seized is subject to forfeiture to the state under this section regardless of ownership. Property seized may be recovered by its owner by depositing with the department or into court a cash bond or equivalent security equal to the value of the seized property but not more than one hundred thousand dollars. Such cash bond or security is subject to forfeiture in lieu of the property. Forfeiture of property seized under this section is a civil forfeiture against property and is intended to be a remedial civil sanction.
(2) In the event of a seizure of property under this section, jurisdiction to begin the forfeiture proceedings shall commence upon seizure. Within fifteen days following the seizure, the seizing authority shall serve a written notice of intent to forfeit property on the owner of the property seized and on any person having any known right or interest in the property seized. Notice may be served by any method authorized by law or court rule, including service by certified mail with return receipt requested. Service by mail is deemed complete upon mailing within the fifteen-day period following the seizure.
(3) Persons claiming a right of ownership or right to possession of property are entitled to a hearing to contest forfeiture. Such a claim shall specify the claim of ownership or possession and shall be made in writing and served on the director within forty-five days of the seizure. If the seizing authority has complied with notice requirements and there is no claim made within forty-five days, then the property shall be forfeited to the state.
(4) If any person timely serves the director with a claim to property, the person shall be afforded an opportunity to be heard as to the person's claim or right. The hearing shall be before the director or director's designee, or before an administrative law judge appointed under chapter 34.12 RCW, except that a person asserting a claim or right may remove the matter to a court of competent jurisdiction if the aggregate value of the property seized is more than five thousand dollars. The department may settle a person's claim of ownership prior to the administrative hearing.
(5) The hearing to contest forfeiture and any subsequent appeal shall be as provided for in chapter 34.05 RCW, the administrative procedure act. The seizing authority has the burden to demonstrate that it had reason to believe the property was held with intent to violate or was used in violation of this title or rule of the commission or director. The person contesting forfeiture has the burden of production and proof by a preponderance of evidence that the person owns or has a right to possess the property and:
(a) That the property was not held with intent to violate or used in violation of this title; or
(b) If the property is a boat, airplane, or vehicle, that the illegal use or planned illegal use of the boat, airplane, or vehicle occurred without the owner's knowledge or consent, and that the owner acted reasonably to prevent illegal uses of such boat, airplane, or vehicle.
(6) A forfeiture of a conveyance encumbered by a perfected security interest is subject to the interest of the secured party if the secured party neither had knowledge of nor consented to the act or omission. No security interest in seized property may be perfected after seizure.
(7) If seized property is forfeited under this section the department may retain it for official use unless the property is required to be destroyed, or upon application by any law enforcement agency of the state, release such property to the agency for the use of enforcing this title, or sell such property, and deposit the proceeds to the fish and wildlife enforcement reward account created in RCW 77.15.425.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bigtex on June 12, 2016, 06:25:38 PM
Sort of a side question but I think was asked a few pages ago. Why did he not lose truck/rifle/elk head/etc....didn't rt lose everything when he was accused of poaching a few years ago?? And that was just on a two pt md! Not even for what the state claims as a trophy! Just curious if this were a serious offense why the same isn't being done with this current case? (Rt was found NOT GUILTY to any new readers btw)
That's a very good point. It seems I heard that if you voluntarily give them your weapon they take it, but they can't take if you say no. Is that correct?
Another question, I've heard of wardens entering a home and taking all sorts of things, how does that work?
#1 Officers (any LEO enforcing F&W laws not just WDFW) can seize it under their authority, you can't say "no"
#2 Pursuant to a search warrant. Or if the person allows them to.
Thanks for clarification.

So if you are found innocent does all your stuff have to be returned?
Well first off we need to understand there are items that are seized as evidence in the criminal case, and there are items seized civilly. The civil forfeiture is the law most people know about it is essentially a separate case from the criminal case. The criminal judge can order the return of the evidence in the criminal case, but they have no jurisdiction in the civil forfeiture.

As you can see in the above RCW you are notified via an official notice regarding your rights in the civil forfeiture. If you get the notice and do nothing and it turns out months down the road you are found not guilty your items will not be returned because you failed to follow the law in contesting the forfeiture. Essentially you need to tell WDFW within 45 days of their notice you want your stuff back and are contesting it.

So here's my 'advice'. If you are "wrongfully" charged and an officer seizes property for forfeiture immediately file the claim that you are contesting the forfeiture. At least now you could use the criminal case adjudication in the civil case. So if you are found not guilty criminally you could bring that up in the civil forfeiture contest hearing.

Prosecutors have one year to file misdemeanor charges and two years to file gross misdemeanor charges (such as unlawful take of big game 2nd degree) so obviously that is outside of that 45 day contest notification window. You definitely don't want to be sitting around thinking well when I am found not guilty WDFW will give me my stuff, because under state law that's not how it works.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: rtspring on June 12, 2016, 06:34:45 PM
Sort of a side question but I think was asked a few pages ago. Why did he not lose truck/rifle/elk head/etc....didn't rt lose everything when he was accused of poaching a few years ago?? And that was just on a two pt md! Not even for what the state claims as a trophy! Just curious if this were a serious offense why the same isn't being done with this current case? (Rt was found NOT GUILTY to any new readers btw)
That's a very good point. It seems I heard that if you voluntarily give them your weapon they take it, but they can't take if you say no. Is that correct?
Another question, I've heard of wardens entering a home and taking all sorts of things, how does that work?
#1 Officers (any LEO enforcing F&W laws not just WDFW) can seize it under their authority, you can't say "no"
#2 Pursuant to a search warrant. Or if the person allows them to.
Thanks for clarification.

So if you are found innocent does all your stuff have to be returned?
Well first off we need to understand there are items that are seized as evidence in the criminal case, and there are items seized civilly. The civil forfeiture is the law most people know about it is essentially a separate case from the criminal case. The criminal judge can order the return of the evidence in the criminal case, but they have no jurisdiction in the civil forfeiture.

As you can see in the above RCW you are notified via an official notice regarding your rights in the civil forfeiture. If you get the notice and do nothing and it turns out months down the road you are found not guilty your items will not be returned because you failed to follow the law in contesting the forfeiture. Essentially you need to tell WDFW within 45 days of their notice you want your stuff back and are contesting it.

So here's my 'advice'. If you are "wrongfully" charged and an officer seizes property for forfeiture immediately file the claim that you are contesting the forfeiture. At least now you could use the criminal case adjudication in the civil case. So if you are found not guilty criminally you could bring that up in the civil forfeiture contest hearing.

Prosecutors have one year to file misdemeanor charges and two years to file gross misdemeanor charges (such as unlawful take of big game 2nd degree) so obviously that is outside of that 45 day contest notification window. You definitely don't want to be sitting around thinking well when I am found not guilty WDFW will give me my stuff, because under state law that's not how it works.

In other words, WDFW are thieves!  Why would anyone PAY to get a gun back when they did nothing wrong!  This is what mudt do withing Bigtex's 45 day response he is talking about in the civil part.   And why is there two rules to one crime?

Absolutely double standards!  I hate the WDFW people.  Dont worry I got my stuff back in monetary terms way over what my gun was worth. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bigtex on June 12, 2016, 06:37:46 PM
Sort of a side question but I think was asked a few pages ago. Why did he not lose truck/rifle/elk head/etc....didn't rt lose everything when he was accused of poaching a few years ago?? And that was just on a two pt md! Not even for what the state claims as a trophy! Just curious if this were a serious offense why the same isn't being done with this current case? (Rt was found NOT GUILTY to any new readers btw)
That's a very good point. It seems I heard that if you voluntarily give them your weapon they take it, but they can't take if you say no. Is that correct?
Another question, I've heard of wardens entering a home and taking all sorts of things, how does that work?
#1 Officers (any LEO enforcing F&W laws not just WDFW) can seize it under their authority, you can't say "no"
#2 Pursuant to a search warrant. Or if the person allows them to.
Thanks for clarification.

So if you are found innocent does all your stuff have to be returned?
Well first off we need to understand there are items that are seized as evidence in the criminal case, and there are items seized civilly. The civil forfeiture is the law most people know about it is essentially a separate case from the criminal case. The criminal judge can order the return of the evidence in the criminal case, but they have no jurisdiction in the civil forfeiture.

As you can see in the above RCW you are notified via an official notice regarding your rights in the civil forfeiture. If you get the notice and do nothing and it turns out months down the road you are found not guilty your items will not be returned because you failed to follow the law in contesting the forfeiture. Essentially you need to tell WDFW within 45 days of their notice you want your stuff back and are contesting it.

So here's my 'advice'. If you are "wrongfully" charged and an officer seizes property for forfeiture immediately file the claim that you are contesting the forfeiture. At least now you could use the criminal case adjudication in the civil case. So if you are found not guilty criminally you could bring that up in the civil forfeiture contest hearing.

Prosecutors have one year to file misdemeanor charges and two years to file gross misdemeanor charges (such as unlawful take of big game 2nd degree) so obviously that is outside of that 45 day contest notification window. You definitely don't want to be sitting around thinking well when I am found not guilty WDFW will give me my stuff, because under state law that's not how it works.
In other words, WDFW are thieves!  Why would anyone PAY to get a gun back when they did nothing wrong!  This is what mudt do withing Bigtex's 45 day response he is talking about in the civil part.   And why is there two rules to one crime?
If I remember correctly you took a plea deal on the criminal charges.....

I know of many instances where gear was handed over at no charge once individuals were found to be not guilty in the criminal case.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Alchase on June 12, 2016, 07:05:16 PM
It seems the forfeiture laws are "subjectively inforced" or is there extenuating circumstances to why the were not enforced in this case.
With so many people involved it would be a windfall for the WDFW, lol
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: rtspring on June 12, 2016, 07:39:41 PM
One  more thing, my gun sas not seized, I gave it to them to test it as noted in court documents, then they seized it in accordance with their way of stealing it!   
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bigtex on June 12, 2016, 07:42:12 PM
It seems the forfeiture laws are "subjectively inforced" or is there extenuating circumstances to why the were not enforced in this case.
With so many people involved it would be a windfall for the WDFW, lol
Civil forfeiture is not used in all cases, in fact I'd say it's probably used in like 1-3% of all WDFW cases. It all comes down to officer discretion.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on June 12, 2016, 07:43:33 PM
This whole Bullwinkle thread is very confusing.

I didn't think there was even a Governor's tag for moose in 334???
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: rtspring on June 12, 2016, 07:49:54 PM
Sort of a side question but I think was asked a few pages ago. Why did he not lose truck/rifle/elk head/etc....didn't rt lose everything when he was accused of poaching a few years ago?? And that was just on a two pt md! Not even for what the state claims as a trophy! Just curious if this were a serious offense why the same isn't being done with this current case? (Rt was found NOT GUILTY to any new readers btw)
That's a very good point. It seems I heard that if you voluntarily give them your weapon they take it, but they can't take if you say no. Is that correct?
Another question, I've heard of wardens entering a home and taking all sorts of things, how does that work?
#1 Officers (any LEO enforcing F&W laws not just WDFW) can seize it under their authority, you can't say "no"
#2 Pursuant to a search warrant. Or if the person allows them to.
Thanks for clarification.

So if you are found innocent does all your stuff have to be returned?
Well first off we need to understand there are items that are seized as evidence in the criminal case, and there are items seized civilly. The civil forfeiture is the law most people know about it is essentially a separate case from the criminal case. The criminal judge can order the return of the evidence in the criminal case, but they have no jurisdiction in the civil forfeiture.

As you can see in the above RCW you are notified via an official notice regarding your rights in the civil forfeiture. If you get the notice and do nothing and it turns out months down the road you are found not guilty your items will not be returned because you failed to follow the law in contesting the forfeiture. Essentially you need to tell WDFW within 45 days of their notice you want your stuff back and are contesting it.

So here's my 'advice'. If you are "wrongfully" charged and an officer seizes property for forfeiture immediately file the claim that you are contesting the forfeiture. At least now you could use the criminal case adjudication in the civil case. So if you are found not guilty criminally you could bring that up in the civil forfeiture contest hearing.

Prosecutors have one year to file misdemeanor charges and two years to file gross misdemeanor charges (such as unlawful take of big game 2nd degree) so obviously that is outside of that 45 day contest notification window. You definitely don't want to be sitting around thinking well when I am found not guilty WDFW will give me my stuff, because under state law that's not how it works.
In other words, WDFW are thieves!  Why would anyone PAY to get a gun back when they did nothing wrong!  This is what mudt do withing Bigtex's 45 day response he is talking about in the civil part.   And why is there two rules to one crime?
If I remember correctly you took a plea deal on the criminal charges.....

I know of many instances where gear was handed over at no charge once individuals were found to be not guilty in the criminal case.

So your saying, if one already spent 5000 grand on attorney fees, After being lied to by WDFW he should keep paying to fight his case to get a 500.00 gun back?  Sugar coat it all you want but the current way WDFW steal peoples stuff is ludicrist at best.  But yet WE thd public are to support them? No way!  I have never ever been in cuffs let alone arrested for any crime and yet I lost due to the money I would have to put out to win.   How in the heck is that fair? 

Your people are thieves hiding behind badges and paperwork that only an attorney cant understand. I did not plead guilty.  And why was I in a courtroom with a judge who could punish me if found guilty but the same judge does not have authority to give my gun back even though he ordered it in writing to be given back???


Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bigtex on June 12, 2016, 07:55:52 PM
Your people are thieves hiding behind badges and paperwork that only an attorney cant understand. I did not plead guilty.  And why was I in a courtroom with a judge who could punish me if found guilty but the same judge does not have authority to give my gun back even though he ordered it in writing to be given back???
You did take a plea deal in which you had to essentially not violate any laws for a few months correct?

I will only say it once because we have discussed it before. You have criminal judges who handle criminal cases and administrative judges who handle civil/administrative cases. If you don't understand that then sign up for intro to law classes at your local community college.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: chester on June 12, 2016, 07:58:17 PM
Your people are thieves hiding behind badges and paperwork that only an attorney cant understand. I did not plead guilty.  And why was I in a courtroom with a judge who could punish me if found guilty but the same judge does not have authority to give my gun back even though he ordered it in writing to be given back???
You did take a plea deal in which you had to essentially not violate any laws for a few months correct?

I will only say it once because we have discussed it before. You have criminal judges who handle criminal cases and administrative judges who handle civil/administrative cases. If you don't understand that then sign up for intro to law classes at your local community college.
I think the point he's trying to make is that just because that's the way it is doesn't make it right.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on June 12, 2016, 08:08:29 PM
Why would you take a plea deal if you were innocent?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: mfswallace on June 12, 2016, 08:14:13 PM
Why would you take a plea deal if you were innocent?

And OJ was innocent right :chuckle: Oh yeah he was found guilty in civil court :dunno:

That's the chance you take with the system even if innocent, can't blame anyone for making sure they don't get railroaded to the pokey
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on June 12, 2016, 08:17:25 PM
Why would you take a plea deal if you were innocent?

And OJ was innocent right :chuckle: Oh yeah he was found guilty in civil court :dunno:

That's the chance you take with the system even if innocent, can't blame anyone for making sure they don't get railroaded to the pokey
Well if I was innocent, I not only would not take a plea deal,  I would see the WDFW in civil court.  They seem to hemorrhage money in that system.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on June 12, 2016, 08:23:55 PM
This whole Bullwinkle thread is very confusing.

I didn't think there was even a Governor's tag for moose in 334???
It was the raffle tag. ... :dunno:  :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: mfswallace on June 12, 2016, 08:30:27 PM
Why would you take a plea deal if you were innocent?

And OJ was innocent right :chuckle: Oh yeah he was found guilty in civil court :dunno:

That's the chance you take with the system even if innocent, can't blame anyone for making sure they don't get railroaded to the pokey
Well if I was innocent, I not only would not take a plea deal,  I would see the WDFW in civil court.  They seem to hemorrhage money in that system.

Innocence sometimes has nothing to do with the legal system :twocents:

PopeShawn gave a great example of a dui victims account of being setup by the system.

Look at this thread... Fact-- TR shot a branched antlered elk in a closed gmu yet it is up for interpretation by a judge or jury who will decide what guilt or innocence is...
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on June 12, 2016, 08:36:00 PM
Why would you take a plea deal if you were innocent?

And OJ was innocent right :chuckle: Oh yeah he was found guilty in civil court :dunno:

That's the chance you take with the system even if innocent, can't blame anyone for making sure they don't get railroaded to the pokey
Well if I was innocent, I not only would not take a plea deal,  I would see the WDFW in civil court.  They seem to hemorrhage money in that system.

Innocence sometimes has nothing to do with the legal system :twocents:

PopeShawn gave a great example of a dui victims account of being setup by the system.

Look at this thread... Fact-- TR shot a branched antlered elk in a closed gmu yet it is up for interpretation by a judge or jury who will decide what guilt or innocence is...
I think there's a little more to it than that.  I do agree with part of your statement.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: STIKNSTRINGBOW on June 12, 2016, 09:23:23 PM
In my mind, there is little doubt about guilt or innocence, intent is obvious in this case.
He had a tag, chose an animal to put the tag on, then proceeded to harvest the animal he chose without regard to the rules that apply.
No matter the outcome of this case, it will have little impact on the future of Elk in Washington.
It is already headed towards a matter of how many dollars you can afford.
Unless you are one of the lucky few who can draw a permit, you will be forced to camp during hunting season, but only if you can afford to pay the access fee.
Much like the elk population, and free public access, this too will go away... eventually.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on June 14, 2016, 08:53:12 AM
Eastside counties aren't immune to this. Basically if you have an interstate highway in your county the prosecutor will be too busy to  handle fish and wildlife cases.
Kittitas County has an interstate hwy running thru it and they are prosecuting the bullwinkle case.  Is that simply because it is such a high profile case?  Do they drop most other poaching cases? :dunno:
Kittitas is not good at fish and wildlife cases. They're standard plea policy is to drop criminal cases to an infraction if you are a good boy for a few months.

I didn't want to get the other thread too far off topic so I copied and pasted the posts here.  Sounds like a good chance TR will get a slap on the wrist if history in Kittitas Co is any indication of what will happen in this case. 

Will definitely be interesting to see what happens in the case. :twocents:

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: REHJWA on June 14, 2016, 11:21:45 AM
Crazy how this case gets so much more attention :dunno:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on June 16, 2016, 09:42:47 PM
Looks like a nice bull.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on June 20, 2016, 10:47:34 PM
http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/trophy-hunter-charged-with-illegal-kill-of-bullwinkle-prized-ellensburg-elk/

Quote
"Reichert told police that he had relied on the locals to tell him if they “were good to go” on the hunt, and they had said yes."

 Interesting, Reichert talks to police but doesn't mention the alleged "phone calls" to WDFW. That's a critical bit of information he left out isn't it? :dunno:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: mfswallace on June 20, 2016, 11:14:12 PM
http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/trophy-hunter-charged-with-illegal-kill-of-bullwinkle-prized-ellensburg-elk/

Quote
"Reichert told police that he had relied on the locals to tell him if they “were good to go” on the hunt, and they had said yes."

 Interesting, Reichert talks to police but doesn't mention the alleged "phone calls" to WDFW. That's a critical bit of information he left out isn't it? :dunno:

Probably those same locals who joined this site about 2 months ago trying to get in the clear :yike:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on June 21, 2016, 12:05:55 AM
http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/trophy-hunter-charged-with-illegal-kill-of-bullwinkle-prized-ellensburg-elk/

Quote
"Reichert told police that he had relied on the locals to tell him if they “were good to go” on the hunt, and they had said yes."

 Interesting, Reichert talks to police but doesn't mention the alleged "phone calls" to WDFW. That's a critical bit of information he left out isn't it? :dunno:

Probably those same locals who joined this site about 2 months ago trying to get in the clear :yike:

 Could it be one of these locals that made a call, gave Reichert the wrong info, and then came on hear to attempt to cover their butts? :chuckle:

 Seems odd that had Tod himself actually been in contact with WDFW, and given the "good to go", that he would forget to mention that little tidbit to police. :dunno:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Ghost Hunter on June 21, 2016, 06:58:15 AM
Does this mean the guide doesn't get a tip? :dunno: :bash:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: X-Force on June 21, 2016, 09:40:38 AM
I wonder if the same guys threatening to sue Hunt-Wa members will be sending the same threats to ST?

 :chuckle: :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Alchase on June 21, 2016, 09:58:00 AM
Why does it always seem only about the money?

"The Kittitas County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office had offered a stay of proceedings if Reichert paid a $12,000 civil penalty, forfeited hunting rights for 12 months and performed 24 hours of community service."

So he pays $12k and no conviction!!

Does that mean he also forfeits 2016's tags and money?

$12K is nothing to this "alleged Poacher"

What a crock of crap!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bob33 on June 21, 2016, 10:19:53 AM
Why does it always seem only about the money?

"The Kittitas County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office had offered a stay of proceedings if Reichert paid a $12,000 civil penalty, forfeited hunting rights for 12 months and performed 24 hours of community service."

So he pays $12k and no conviction!!

Does that mean he also forfeits 2016's tags and money?

$12K is nothing to this "alleged Poacher"

What a crock of crap!
I'm not sure what good 2016 tags would be if hunting rights were forfeited.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JimmyHoffa on June 21, 2016, 10:33:25 AM
http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/trophy-hunter-charged-with-illegal-kill-of-bullwinkle-prized-ellensburg-elk/

Quote
"Reichert told police that he had relied on the locals to tell him if they “were good to go” on the hunt, and they had said yes."

 Interesting, Reichert talks to police but doesn't mention the alleged "phone calls" to WDFW. That's a critical bit of information he left out isn't it? :dunno:
Yeah, somehow knew that once it was picked up by the Seattle Slimes it would generate good press for hunting.....
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Alchase on June 21, 2016, 10:51:03 AM
Why does it always seem only about the money?

"The Kittitas County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office had offered a stay of proceedings if Reichert paid a $12,000 civil penalty, forfeited hunting rights for 12 months and performed 24 hours of community service."

So he pays $12k and no conviction!!

Does that mean he also forfeits 2016's tags and money?

$12K is nothing to this "alleged Poacher"

What a crock of crap!
I'm not sure what good 2016 tags would be if hunting rights were forfeited.

It says "forfeit hunting rights for 12 months"
It does not say when the twelve months would start.
It also does not say if he gets back his "$75,000 for the same hunt in 2016".

Or are they going to "wink, wink, nudge, nudge" delay until after he has the opportunity to hunt in the fall?

$12k is nothing to someone who spends $100K in tags every year. So he does not hunt in Washington for 2016. He probably has many tags throughout the country to hunt instead.

And he ends up with no conviction, again!

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: NOCK NOCK on June 21, 2016, 12:21:46 PM
Kiti, I believe you were the one who's post was nuked that was comparing a members failure to purchase a new license for the new year ticket to the Bullwinkle killing, suggesting they were both mistakes.

Forgive me if I missed them, but searched through many pages and did not find a direct answer to several questions that have been asked of you. You have stated you are here to clear things up, sooooo please give me some insight on these basic questions.

1. Was TR's shooting this particular bull a mistake, or was it all legit per the WDFW phone calls?

2. I know you have stated "2 calls were made", were there only 2,or more?

3. Were these calls all out going from TR's group, or did a WDFW employee call back?

4. Were any of these calls recorded?

5. Was the bull killed the same day the calls were made?

6. Was the bull tagged at the kill site, or at the processing site? 

7. What unit was listed as the place of kill on the hunters report?

8. You and a couple others are very defensive of this situation. Are you defending TR, or just trying to CYA?


I believe that a simple yes or no, or a couple words can answer all of these, and will help you clear things up (which is why you are here correct) for a lot of folks on here.
Thank you for your time.

#1. Mistake on WDFW part. When the calls were made WDFW gave the ok after looking into it.

#2. Was clear before on that. How many would it take to be ok in your mind. One or five I think personally shold be enough when they come up with a crystal clear answer?

#3 both

#4  no,  but witnessed by several.

#5  no a day later.

#6 was moved to  3 dressed per request of the landowner that didn't want a gut pile in his field.

#7 not sure. Don't know? 

Go ahead and ask #8, 9 and 10.


Kiti,
Thank you very much for answering the questions. I get the answer of #6, but, it does not answer the original question of where the bull was tagged :dunno:

Forgive me but I do not understand your reply of "Go ahead and ask #8, 9, 10"  :dunno:


I think I am starting to understand kiti's answer/non-answer to #8  ;)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bob33 on June 21, 2016, 12:54:08 PM
Why does it always seem only about the money?

"The Kittitas County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office had offered a stay of proceedings if Reichert paid a $12,000 civil penalty, forfeited hunting rights for 12 months and performed 24 hours of community service."

So he pays $12k and no conviction!!

Does that mean he also forfeits 2016's tags and money?

$12K is nothing to this "alleged Poacher"

What a crock of crap!
I'm not sure what good 2016 tags would be if hunting rights were forfeited.

It says "forfeit hunting rights for 12 months"
It does not say when the twelve months would start.
It also does not say if he gets back his "$75,000 for the same hunt in 2016".

Or are they going to "wink, wink, nudge, nudge" delay until after he has the opportunity to hunt in the fall?

$12k is nothing to someone who spends $100K in tags every year. So he does not hunt in Washington for 2016. He probably has many tags throughout the country to hunt instead.

And he ends up with no conviction, again!
No, it doesn't say when the 12 months start. That would be negotiated between the prosecutor and the defendant. I'm not aware of any reason why the prosecutor would want to delay the start.

Getting his $75,000 back - I don't see that listed as part of the agreement.

If his hunting rights are suspended in Washington, they should be suspended in all states because of the Interstate Wildlife Violator Compact.

It may well be that not negotiating a settlement could mean an extended legal battle for 18 to 24 months, during which time he would be able to freely hunt and could end up being completely exonerated.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on June 21, 2016, 12:57:42 PM
http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/trophy-hunter-charged-with-illegal-kill-of-bullwinkle-prized-ellensburg-elk/

Quote
"Reichert told police that he had relied on the locals to tell him if they “were good to go” on the hunt, and they had said yes."

 Interesting, Reichert talks to police but doesn't mention the alleged "phone calls" to WDFW. That's a critical bit of information he left out isn't it? :dunno:

Yep
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on June 21, 2016, 12:59:06 PM
http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/trophy-hunter-charged-with-illegal-kill-of-bullwinkle-prized-ellensburg-elk/

Quote
"Reichert told police that he had relied on the locals to tell him if they “were good to go” on the hunt, and they had said yes."

 Interesting, Reichert talks to police but doesn't mention the alleged "phone calls" to WDFW. That's a critical bit of information he left out isn't it? :dunno:

Probably those same locals who joined this site about 2 months ago trying to get in the clear :yike:

 Could it be one of these locals that made a call, gave Reichert the wrong info, and then came on hear to attempt to cover their butts? :chuckle:

 Seems odd that had Tod himself actually been in contact with WDFW, and given the "good to go", that he would forget to mention that little tidbit to police. :dunno:

Yep, a lot of CYA going after some facts start to come out. :chuckle
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bob33 on June 21, 2016, 12:59:52 PM
By
Erik Lacitis 

Seattle Times staff reporter

ELLENSBURG — It was midmorning when Leon Mankowski was outside his home putting up Christmas lights last Dec. 1.

It was a Tuesday. When you’re 71 and retired from the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard, you decide when you feel like putting up holiday decorations.

Mankowski remembers that day well.

Suddenly he’s hearing shots. “KABOOM!” he remembers.

By the second shot he has a pretty good idea of what’s going on.

Bullwinkle — the bull elk that had become a local celebrity, the elk that didn’t mind at all when gawkers drove up to the hayfields to photograph him and his buddies — has been killed.

As the state’s Department of Fish & Wildlife puts it, sure the five bull elk in the group were considered wild, but they also had “habituated to valley life,” the laid-back life in the farm fields and among the fruit trees.

“This was murder, plain and simple,” says Mankowski about the wealthy hunter charged with shooting Bullwinkle.

“I’m guessing he probably got 50, 60 feet away from that elk when he shot him. Now that’s hunting, in the middle of a field? Disgusting is what it is.”

Mankowski is referring to Tod Reichert, 76, a self-made entrepreneur from Salkum, a tiny unincorporated community in Lewis County.

Reichert made his fortune by starting a shake mill from scratch in the 1970s with a three-man crew, says the website for Reichert Shake & Fencing.

He has spent $214,200 since 2007 for auction trophy permits in this state, with the big chunks being $47,000 in 2007; $50,000 in 2015 for an elk hunt in Eastern Washington; and $75,000 for the same hunt in 2016, according to state and court records.

The state says its auctions generate money for “the management of the hunted species.” Critics wonder about the ethics of selling a public hunt to the highest bidder.

This is not the first time that Reichert has faced hunting-related charges in this state.
 
In 2012 he pleaded guilty to interfering and giving false information five years earlier to a U.S. Forest Service officer regarding an elk hunt in the Umatilla National Forest. He was fined $5,000 and agreed not to hunt in national forests for two years.

In that case, Reichert had used an outfitter not authorized to provide guide services in that forest and was not truthful about it. The outfitter also used a helicopter to spot the elk, a crime in this state.

In the Bullwinkle case, Reichert faces criminal charges of unlawful hunting of big game in the second degree.

According to a report from the state’s Fish & Wildlife police, Reichert shot Bullwinkle in an area not open to “branched antler bull elk” hunting. As male elk mature, their antlers branch out, last one season, fall off, and the process starts again the next year.

The state says they can’t be hunted in that area because it’s mostly private land and there were few bull elk there besides Bullwinkle and his habituated buddies. Not much of a hunting experience.

Reichert did not return a phone or email message. His Spokane attorney, Stephen Hormel, said he had no comment, other than his client has pleaded not guilty. A pretrial hearing in Lower Kittitas County District Court is set for Tuesday.

The Kittitas County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office had offered a stay of proceedings if Reichert paid a $12,000 civil penalty, forfeited hunting rights for 12 months and performed 24 hours of community service.

He pulls up on his computer the dozens and dozens of photos he took of the elk, which sometimes rested near his living-room window. His dog would visit them.

He remembers them splashing around in a pond he had built in his garden.

“I felt privileged that such a majestic animal would grace our presence,” says Mankoswki. “Then this schmuck comes along.”

He says that on some days there would be a traffic jam on the country road where he lives — “people taking pictures, taking movies; the elk didn’t care.”

The locals had given Bullwinkle other names, too — Fat *censored*, Fat Boy, F.B., Chief Joe, Ranger, Schnebly’s Elk, the latter because he liked to hang around Craig and Nancy Schnebly’s farm.

Craig Schnebly brings out a huge antler that Bullwinkle dropped two years before at his 300-acre alfalfa and timothy hay farm.

The antler is 4¾ feet long. It weighs more than 16 pounds. It has 8 points — the top rung in antlers, “a monarch bull.”

“It’s just amazing,” he says.

Schnebly, 63, is also a hunter.

But hunting an elk in a hayfield?

“It’s stretching my definition,” says Schnebly.

He estimates Bullwinkle was 12, still in his prime. “He was the most confident of the bunch. He carried himself with authority. He pushed the other bulls around here.”

Schnebly says he didn’t mind the damage the bull elk caused on his property.

“I guess it was a welcome nuisance,” he says, having the 800- to 900-pound Bullwinkle and his pals around.

Bullwinkle liked to lay down in the hayfield.

“He would eat as far as he could reach, mow down the section around him, get up and bed down again,” says Schnebly.

As the antlers grow they are covered by a hairy skin known as velvet. The bulls rub the velvet on tree branches and it eventually falls off. Schnebly points to a plum tree. “Torn to smithereens.”

He would ask Bullwinkle why he’d go after his fruit trees when there were plenty of other trees around.


“He’d just stand there, look at me, take a few steps and wander off to the apple trees,” says Schnebly.

Expensive hunt

To get Bullwinkle, besides the $50,000 he spent at the state auction, Reichert also bought 313 of the 2,746 raffle tickets (11 percent of the total) going for $6 each for an Eastern Washington elk permit. He won one. He used that raffle permit to kill Bullwinkle.

He has spent big money for auction permits in other states, too.

In 2007, for example, Reichert paid $40,000 for a “New Mexico Governor’s Tag” for an elk hunt.

In Ellensburg, the death of Bullwinkle lingers on with the locals.

He tells of looking at the hayfield from his home that Tuesday morning and seeing a group of men, one of them wearing a blazing orange hunting vest.

Mankowski ran to his pickup while dialing 911 on his cellphone and asking for the poaching hotline.

He says, “By the time I got here they had already loaded him in the truck. All I could see was antlers and feet sticking out.”

The incident report from Fish & Wildlife officials tells of some locals saying they “were just helping out” Reichert.

One of them, says the report, told police that Bullwinkle “was somewhat of a neighborhood pet and it would probably generate calls from people complaining.”

The report says that the owner of the hayfield had given permission for the hunt to take place, and that Reichert told police that he had relied on the locals to tell him if they “were good to go” on the hunt, and they had said yes.

The report says it was up to Reichert to find out if that location was permitted for hunting branched antler bull elk.

This group of bulls had been around for five years. One got hit by a vehicle. Another was shot. Then Bullwinkle was killed.

Now there are two left.

Mankowski says they don’t show themselves much in the daytime.

“They sleep in the willow, hiding all day,” he says. “They saw their buddy shot in front of them.”
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on June 21, 2016, 04:44:18 PM
 A little birdie just told me Reichert has had a condition put on him at court, he can't hunt while the case is pending...case continued otherwise.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: TVHunts on June 21, 2016, 05:34:40 PM
A little birdie just told me Reichert has had a condition put on him at court, he can't hunt while the case is pending...case continued otherwise.

Good little birdie  :tup:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JimmyHoffa on June 21, 2016, 05:41:55 PM
A little birdie just told me Reichert has had a condition put on him at court, he can't hunt while the case is pending...case continued otherwise.
Is that a no hunting in Kittias county or WA state or the real deal anywhere on the planet?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bigtex on June 21, 2016, 05:42:58 PM
The Kittitas County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office had offered a stay of proceedings if Reichert paid a $12,000 civil penalty, forfeited hunting rights for 12 months and performed 24 hours of community service.
So if he were to take the deal, pay his $12k to WDFW, be a good boy and do 24 hours of community service he would have no criminal conviction, no DFW conviction. Sounds like another fantastic deal out of Kittitas County.  :bash:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on June 21, 2016, 05:44:44 PM
A little birdie just told me Reichert has had a condition put on him at court, he can't hunt while the case is pending...case continued otherwise.

If that's true, it's awesome!  :tup:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on June 21, 2016, 05:51:36 PM
A little birdie just told me Reichert has had a condition put on him at court, he can't hunt while the case is pending...case continued otherwise.

If that's true, it's awesome!  :tup:

 Id wager everything I own on this guys word! :twocents:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on June 21, 2016, 06:17:29 PM
Jdhasty?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on June 21, 2016, 08:53:31 PM
The Kittitas County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office had offered a stay of proceedings if Reichert paid a $12,000 civil penalty, forfeited hunting rights for 12 months and performed 24 hours of community service.
So if he were to take the deal, pay his $12k to WDFW, be a good boy and do 24 hours of community service he would have no criminal conviction, no DFW conviction. Sounds like another fantastic deal out of Kittitas County.  :bash:
If that is true I think I might have taken that deal with what I have heard of the case.  All I know is what has been posted on here and in the press.  I just think I might have taken the deal and tried to get this behind me.  It will be interesting to see where it goes from here.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on June 21, 2016, 08:58:16 PM
Jdhasty?

 :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bob33 on June 21, 2016, 09:00:26 PM
The Kittitas County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office had offered a stay of proceedings if Reichert paid a $12,000 civil penalty, forfeited hunting rights for 12 months and performed 24 hours of community service.
So if he were to take the deal, pay his $12k to WDFW, be a good boy and do 24 hours of community service he would have no criminal conviction, no DFW conviction. Sounds like another fantastic deal out of Kittitas County.  :bash:
I think the loss of hunting in the US for 12 months is not an insignificant consequence for someone at his age who values hunting as much as he does.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on June 21, 2016, 09:37:17 PM
Geez, how many pages would this thing go if he shot a Gorilla in Kittitas?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 92xj on June 21, 2016, 09:37:56 PM
Glad the judge is sticking to his guns and holding the "hunter" responsible for his own actions, or lack there of, by not contacting the wdfw for himself.
Was anything seized for evidence? Hide, antlers, meat, gun, etc?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 92xj on June 21, 2016, 09:38:34 PM
Geez, how many pages would this thing go if he shot a Gorilla in Kittitas?

Black, brown or albino gorilla?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on June 21, 2016, 09:38:42 PM
Geez, how many pages would this thing go if he shot a Gorilla in Kittitas?


Gorillas don't matter, only Bullwinkles do!  :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Colville on June 21, 2016, 10:11:53 PM
On Q13 news right now after commercial break.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Troutdreamer on June 21, 2016, 10:33:34 PM
http://q13fox.com/2016/06/21/trophy-hunter-appears-in-court-after-killing-beloved-ellensburg-elk/



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jmscon on June 21, 2016, 10:39:31 PM
WOW! Can't wait to hear everything that comes out in the courtroom!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bigtex on June 21, 2016, 10:44:21 PM
http://q13fox.com/2016/06/21/trophy-hunter-appears-in-court-after-killing-beloved-ellensburg-elk/
That article states it a Class C Felony, it isn't. He's facing a gross misdemeanor. In order for the felony charge he has to have a prior big game conviction in the past 5 years, he doesn't. He also wouldn't be in district court, but rather superior court.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JimmyHoffa on June 21, 2016, 10:47:00 PM
http://q13fox.com/2016/06/21/trophy-hunter-appears-in-court-after-killing-beloved-ellensburg-elk/
That article states it a Class C Felony, it isn't. He's facing a gross misdemeanor. In order for the felony charge he has to have a prior big game conviction in the past 5 years, he doesn't.
Your answer made it on here before my question.   :chuckle:  Thanks.  I heard felony and thought what a disparity compared to the Cambodian guy.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on June 22, 2016, 08:55:02 AM
http://q13fox.com/2016/06/21/trophy-hunter-appears-in-court-after-killing-beloved-ellensburg-elk/
That article states it a Class C Felony, it isn't. He's facing a gross misdemeanor. In order for the felony charge he has to have a prior big game conviction in the past 5 years, he doesn't. He also wouldn't be in district court, but rather superior court.

It also stated that the charge was "hunting big game".
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: h20hunter on June 22, 2016, 09:02:59 AM
I thought once this went btother court it would all come out Abe clear that nothing he did was illegal.  Huh, I guess the judge suspending his hunting privileges at this time must have it all wrong. He, the judge, was quoted as saying it is the hunters responsibility to know where the tag was legal.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: crowinghen on June 22, 2016, 09:06:25 AM
A little birdie just told me Reichert has had a condition put on him at court, he can't hunt while the case is pending...case continued otherwise.

What if he calls WDFW and asks someone if he can hunt?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on June 22, 2016, 09:12:13 AM
A little birdie just told me Reichert has had a condition put on him at court, he can't hunt while the case is pending...case continued otherwise.

What if he calls WDFW and asks someone if he can hunt?
  :chuckle: Now that's funny.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: idahohuntr on June 22, 2016, 09:27:13 AM
I hope the judge drops the fine, but raises the loss of hunting to 6-10 years.  A 12k fine for a guy who pays 75k for an elk tag is pointless.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Wenatcheejay on June 22, 2016, 09:28:49 AM
I think people who think there will be a lynching tree are going to be disappointed.

Sent from my SM-G928V using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on June 22, 2016, 09:38:39 AM
After the Operation Cody thing I can't see anything significant coming from this if he is convicted of anything.  At the worst he shot a bull in a closed unit.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bigtex on June 22, 2016, 09:41:59 AM
At the worst he shot a bull in a closed unit.
That's what he's charged with.....
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on June 22, 2016, 09:43:52 AM
A little birdie just told me Reichert has had a condition put on him at court, he can't hunt while the case is pending...case continued otherwise.

Wow.  The evidence must be pretty good then.  The judge must not think much of them trying to use the excuse of calling wdfw and getting permission granted.

Makes it even more suspect that the only question asked was regarding the legality of shooting in that area with a modern rifle.   Interesting..........

Hopefully we will find out someday what exactly was asked of the wdfw employees.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JimmyHoffa on June 22, 2016, 09:51:43 AM
After the Operation Cody thing I can't see anything significant coming from this if he is convicted of anything.  At the worst he shot a bull in a closed unit.
Kind of what I was thinking, but then the different stories by those in the know made it sound like it could evolve into worse once in court.  Ex:  The phone calls and permission--if WDFW denies, then who is lying WDFW or TR and crew.  I think perjury is much worse legally than poaching.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bob33 on June 22, 2016, 10:10:05 AM
I hope the judge drops the fine, but raises the loss of hunting to 6-10 years.  A 12k fine for a guy who pays 75k for an elk tag is pointless.
A one year loss of hunting privileges for a 76 year old with cancer may represent a significant portion of his remaining hunting opportunities: perhaps like a ten year suspension for someone in his 40s or 50s. :twocents:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on June 22, 2016, 10:22:55 AM
My gut still tells me that he wil be found not guilty.

Why else would he reject the pleas, unless he thinks he can win?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Gringo31 on June 22, 2016, 10:25:21 AM
He may reject them, draw it out some, in hopes of the plea deal getting sweeter....
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on June 22, 2016, 10:30:27 AM
I think a jury trial could likely go either way.  If a jury hears that wdfw employees gave the okay, then they are likely to side with the defendant.  He's got a lot of money invested in tags this year and probably not many years of hunting left in him, so that is probably why he doesn't take a deal. 

He just had to drag it out until after September, but now that the judge is saying no more hunting I wonder what he will do?  I would think he can still hunt his out-of-state hunts until after it goes to court though, so maybe he will still drag it out until he can hunt the out-of-state tags he has.  :dunno:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on June 22, 2016, 10:37:40 AM
The offer was one year off of hunting, a fine and some community service, if it goes to trial I don't see him even getting that so it is worth the gamble I would think.  I think the trial is set for August so he could have an answer either way before the hunts can start in September.  I think odds are good one way or another we will have a final outcome by September or sooner.  Then we can talk about that for a few days until something new pops up and takes our attention.  Squirrel!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: TheHunt on June 22, 2016, 11:04:44 AM
I think he will get off with little effects to him.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on June 22, 2016, 11:19:06 AM
I think a jury trial could likely go either way.  If a jury hears that wdfw employees gave the okay, then they are likely to side with the defendant.  He's got a lot of money invested in tags this year and probably not many years of hunting left in him, so that is probably why he doesn't take a deal. 

He just had to drag it out until after September, but now that the judge is saying no more hunting I wonder what he will do?  I would think he can still hunt his out-of-state hunts until after it goes to court though, so maybe he will still drag it out until he can hunt the out-of-state tags he has.  :dunno:

 I heard that it was reported this morning that WDFW denies having given him permission to kill that bull.

 Hmmmm!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: h20hunter on June 22, 2016, 12:13:58 PM
I like the judges logic here.

http://www.nbcrightnow.com/story/32276886/bullwinkles-hunter-goes-to-trial-in-august
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Troutdreamer on June 22, 2016, 12:24:27 PM
I wonder if TR sues the guy in his party that gave him the go ahead.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kentrek on June 22, 2016, 12:41:58 PM
Remember calling fish and game to get clarification on a grey area and I thought I remember my call being recorded  :dunno:


Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on June 22, 2016, 12:45:28 PM
Quote
Reichert's attorney insisted that a hunting partner of Reichert's obtained permission for them to hunt Bullwinkle from state wildlife officials.

 That could set a troublesome precedent if allowed to get him off. :twocents:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Antlershed on June 22, 2016, 12:53:31 PM
Remember calling fish and game to get clarification on a grey area and I thought I remember my call being recorded  :dunno:
I called the enforcement desk back in January to ask them a question and before they answered there was a recording that said, "this call may be monitored or recorded...".
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bob33 on June 22, 2016, 12:54:52 PM
If the “friend” were someone in the business of guiding and outfitting, then perhaps a judge could be convinced that a reasonable person would be justified in believing his advice about the legality of the hunt. However, if the “friend” is nothing more than an acquaintance who doesn’t guide for a living then I believe a hunter should clearly do his own research on what is, and what is not legal.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on June 22, 2016, 01:07:55 PM
I wonder if a finder's fee was paid out for finding Bullwinkle?  And if it was, I would think it should be returned since it was an illegal kill. :twocents:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: mfswallace on June 22, 2016, 01:26:14 PM
If the “friend” were someone in the business of guiding and outfitting, then perhaps a judge could be convinced that a reasonable person would be justified in believing his advice about the legality of the hunt. However, if the “friend” is nothing more than an acquaintance who doesn’t guide for a living then I believe a hunter should clearly do his own research on what is, and what is not legal.

Neither scenario holds up in this case! A life long Washington hunter himself he can't play dumb. If he were hunting somewhere new for first time I might buy believing the professional guide... But still at some point personal responsibility must come into account, to little of that is what's ruining a once great country :twocents:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Gringo31 on June 22, 2016, 01:35:10 PM
Sounds like he's screwed.


He broke the law, killed a bull in an area he wasn't allowed to.

His defense that someone told him it was ok isn't flying.....and the defenders on this site have gone quiet.   :tup:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: teanawayslayer on June 22, 2016, 01:39:57 PM
If I were to hire friends to find me a bull to kill I think I would do a background check on them a bit more before I hired my friends to help me. :twocents:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: grundy53 on June 22, 2016, 01:49:04 PM
I think a jury trial could likely go either way.  If a jury hears that wdfw employees gave the okay, then they are likely to side with the defendant.  He's got a lot of money invested in tags this year and probably not many years of hunting left in him, so that is probably why he doesn't take a deal. 

He just had to drag it out until after September, but now that the judge is saying no more hunting I wonder what he will do?  I would think he can still hunt his out-of-state hunts until after it goes to court though, so maybe he will still drag it out until he can hunt the out-of-state tags he has.  :dunno:

 I heard that it was reported this morning that WDFW denies having given him permission to kill that bull.

 Hmmmm!
I also saw this on the news this morning.

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JJB11B on June 22, 2016, 02:42:24 PM
Time to move after 52 pages  :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on June 22, 2016, 02:51:02 PM
Time to move after 52 pages  :chuckle:

3rd time it's been moved. Where have you been?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JJB11B on June 22, 2016, 02:57:03 PM
Time to move after 52 pages  :chuckle:

3rd time it's been moved. Where have you been?

fishing
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: full choke on June 22, 2016, 02:57:48 PM
Time to move after 52 pages  :chuckle:

3rd time it's been moved. Where have you been?

Are you talking about the bull, or this thread?...
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 2MANY on June 22, 2016, 03:12:33 PM
So were the vehicles used, weapons, elk body and horns all confiscated???
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on June 22, 2016, 03:19:33 PM
Time to move after 52 pages  :chuckle:

3rd time it's been moved. Where have you been?

fishing

Jealous.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on June 22, 2016, 03:19:48 PM
Time to move after 52 pages  :chuckle:

3rd time it's been moved. Where have you been?

Are you talking about the bull, or this thread?...

ZING!!! Badabing!!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: OutHouse on June 22, 2016, 05:02:15 PM
As an attorney who does defense work, I can say based on the facts we know that he doesn't have a strong case. The whole "my buddy called the game department" excuse is quite lame as every hunter is supposed to know the rules. Ignorance of the law is not a defense. At his age, ignorance or mistake of law looks even more absurd. I watched a link that someone posted and his defense attorney did not look confident when he said this was just a mistake and nothing illegal occurred. On the other hand he could go to trial in front of a jury and hope he gets one sympathetic juror. Of course, the prosecutor can simply re-try him until a definitive verdict is reached. This makes all hunters look bad. He killed a tame bull in a farmer's field--that one sentence says it all. As others have commented, every time I call WDFW the recorded message before connection states that the calls are recorded. Looks like his buddies are lying for him?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Alchase on June 22, 2016, 05:06:37 PM
Sounds like he's screwed.


He broke the law, killed a bull in an area he wasn't allowed to.

His defense that someone told him it was ok isn't flying.....and the defenders on this site have gone quiet.   :tup:

Who you going to believe, a bunch of new members who magically appear and basically only post in the defense of someone who has already been convicted of lying?

LOL
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bigtex on June 22, 2016, 05:30:27 PM
Sounds like he's screwed.


He broke the law, killed a bull in an area he wasn't allowed to.

His defense that someone told him it was ok isn't flying.....and the defenders on this site have gone quiet.   :tup:
Who you going to believe, a bunch of new members who magically appear and basically only post in the defense of someone who has already been convicted of lying?

LOL
But come on this is Hunt-WA where every statement made on here is the truth!!!  :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: popeshawnpaul on June 22, 2016, 05:35:54 PM
Lots of good questions to answer here with this new info.

He now has a condition of release to not hunt.  This is not just in WA, but would be a condition anywhere in the world as part of his release in this case.  If he did hunt, he would violate conditions of release and the judge could set bail or take him in custody while the case is pending.  That puts out the fact that he likely will not hunt until this matter is resolved.

He did not turn down the Stay of Proceedings.  He continued the pre-trial scheduling conference.  He can likely still accept the Stay at a later date or try and negotiate the conditions.  One of the conditions is that he not hunt.  This would likely be anywhere unless he negotiated something different with the prosecutor.  That means he likely will not be hunting up until he enters a deal and likely won't hunt if he takes the deal on the table.  Anywhere!

Unless the Stay is negotiated differently, the only way he is going to use his 2016 tag is if he goes to trial and is acquitted before the season is up.  I think the deal is a good one, and he should think about entering it in July.  First, the Stay prevents him from having a conviction on his record.  There will be no further hunting consequences after the year is up.  The one year provision starts when he enters the Stay/deal so July or August.  He would not be able to use his tag this year but could hunt in time for the 2017 season.  If he drags this out past this hunting season and ends up getting convicted or accepts the Stay in January, he would miss the 2016 and 2017 season.  There is benefit to entering this deal sooner rather than later.  The 12k is nothing for him. 

With the scrutiny of a trial, I don't think anyone would want that.  The benefit of a trial is he could try and walk on the case.  He has a guaranteed dismissal through the Stay but the no hunting condition might be important to him.  If he went to trial and was convicted, the loss of hunting rights would extend likely to the states that give reciprocal suspensions.  It's a good legal question whether he could hunt in another country like Canada under the conviction scenario...  He would likely be able to buy a license but would he violate the sentence by hunting in Canada?  I don't know the answer to that question but will look into it.

If he then wants to sue the WDFW or individuals based on the advise they gave him for the 12k and attorney fees plus loss of reputation, so be it. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on June 22, 2016, 05:55:16 PM
I say he skates......   an several Hunt Wa members go into a deep and protracted funk.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Alchase on June 22, 2016, 06:06:30 PM
Sounds like he's screwed.


He broke the law, killed a bull in an area he wasn't allowed to.

His defense that someone told him it was ok isn't flying.....and the defenders on this site have gone quiet.   :tup:
Who you going to believe, a bunch of new members who magically appear and basically only post in the defense of someone who has already been convicted of lying?

LOL
But come on this is Hunt-WA where every statement made on here is the truth!!!  :chuckle:

Touché

LOL
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: TheHunt on June 22, 2016, 06:32:33 PM
Sounds like he's screwed.


He broke the law, killed a bull in an area he wasn't allowed to.

His defense that someone told him it was ok isn't flying.....and the defenders on this site have gone quiet.   :tup:

Who you going to believe, a bunch of new members who magically appear and basically only post in the defense of someone who has already been convicted of lying?

LOL

hahahahaha
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bob33 on June 22, 2016, 07:02:16 PM
Interstate Wildlife Violator Compact

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_Wildlife_Violator_Compact
 (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_Wildlife_Violator_Compact)

"If a person's license or permit privileges which come under the scope of the Compact are suspended or revoked in one member state, they are subject to suspension or revocation in all member states. "
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JimmyHoffa on June 22, 2016, 07:18:39 PM
How would it affect all the record book entries?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: OutHouse on June 22, 2016, 07:36:37 PM
Lots of good questions to answer here with this new info.

He now has a condition of release to not hunt.  This is not just in WA, but would be a condition anywhere in the world as part of his release in this case.  If he did hunt, he would violate conditions of release and the judge could set bail or take him in custody while the case is pending.  That puts out the fact that he likely will not hunt until this matter is resolved.

He did not turn down the Stay of Proceedings.  He continued the pre-trial scheduling conference.  He can likely still accept the Stay at a later date or try and negotiate the conditions.  One of the conditions is that he not hunt.  This would likely be anywhere unless he negotiated something different with the prosecutor.  That means he likely will not be hunting up until he enters a deal and likely won't hunt if he takes the deal on the table.  Anywhere!




Unless the Stay is negotiated differently, the only way he is going to use his 2016 tag is if he goes to trial and is acquitted before the season is up.  I think the deal is a good one, and he should think about entering it in July.  First, the Stay prevents him from having a conviction on his record.  There will be no further hunting consequences after the year is up.  The one year provision starts when he enters the Stay/deal so July or August.  He would not be able to use his tag this year but could hunt in time for the 2017 season.  If he drags this out past this hunting season and ends up getting convicted or accepts the Stay in January, he would miss the 2016 and 2017 season.  There is benefit to entering this deal sooner rather than later.  The 12k is nothing for him. 

With the scrutiny of a trial, I don't think anyone would want that.  The benefit of a trial is he could try and walk on the case.  He has a guaranteed dismissal through the Stay but the no hunting condition might be important to him.  If he went to trial and was convicted, the loss of hunting rights would extend likely to the states that give reciprocal suspensions.  It's a good legal question whether he could hunt in another country like Canada under the conviction scenario...  He would likely be able to buy a license but would he violate the sentence by hunting in Canada?  I don't know the answer to that question but will look into it.

If he then wants to sue the WDFW or individuals based on the advise they gave him for the 12k and attorney fees plus loss of reputation, so be it.

Excellent points, you sound like someone who understands the local criminal procedure well. With regard to your question, the court can order conditions of release, but it must have jurisdiction in order to prevent him from hunting in a foreign country. I'm not sure they have that, unless their is some inter-nation compact that provides the court with power to do so---- or if his foreign hunting would prevent his appearance at a hearing.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bigtex on June 22, 2016, 07:37:32 PM
How would it affect all the record book entries?
it doesn't
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: popeshawnpaul on June 22, 2016, 07:58:29 PM
But you can contract to do anything including no hunting.  I agree it seems likely the court has no jurisdiction over out of state offenses but for a Stay or SOC it's different.  If the contract doesn't specify, I would think it doesn't matter the jurisdiction.   I had a Stay that was revoked in WA on a new violation for a federal license violation in Yellowstone.  Case law says they can.  You always have jurisdiction to revoke a contract if it's violated.  I don't believe it's where the contract is violated unless specified.  Whether wildlife compact or not, if a judge orders no hunting then if he does it in another state they have jurisdiction to find a violation if they have a sworn report with officer observed conduct or they can produce witnesses at a hearing subject to cross to allege the violation.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: teanawayslayer on June 22, 2016, 08:12:28 PM
Pope do you know if there was any property or antlers seized? Or does he have to be found guilty before he has to forfeit the antlers?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: OutHouse on June 22, 2016, 09:12:01 PM
Pope do you know if there was any property or antlers seized? Or does he have to be found guilty before he has to forfeit the antlers?

I am obviously not Pope, however, a recent commenter says he knows for fact that the antlers were not seized, but if the investigating agency was doing their job they would have seized the head and meat as evidence. The Kittitas County Sheriff's Office (or whatever investigating agency) should have that in their possession as evidence in the criminal case.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on June 22, 2016, 09:25:57 PM
Why?

What kind of evidence is that?

The exact bull and the exact location are not at issue in this case.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: popeshawnpaul on June 22, 2016, 09:28:37 PM
If they know where it is they will seize it.  You have to get a warrant for it.  I dont know if it's seized but it would seem they would if they know where it is.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 92xj on June 22, 2016, 09:33:31 PM
If they know where it is they will seize it.  You have to get a warrant for it.  I dont know if it's seized but it would seem they would if they know where it is.

Is it assumed that they are hiding or being hidden? I don't feel that's the case at all, but then again have no idea about pretty much everything relating to this case.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bango skank on June 23, 2016, 03:07:04 AM
I hope the judge drops the fine, but raises the loss of hunting to 6-10 years.  A 12k fine for a guy who pays 75k for an elk tag is pointless.
A one year loss of hunting privileges for a 76 year old with cancer may represent a significant portion of his remaining hunting opportunities: perhaps like a ten year suspension for someone in his 40s or 50s. :twocents:

Well he knew how old he was and decided to poach an elk.  He shouldnt get a reduced punishment cause hes old.  If he lost 5 years yeah thats a lot of water under the bridge.  He should have thought of that before he did what he did.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: popeshawnpaul on June 23, 2016, 07:44:39 AM
If they know where it is they will seize it.  You have to get a warrant for it.  I dont know if it's seized but it would seem they would if they know where it is.

Is it assumed that they are hiding or being hidden? I don't feel that's the case at all, but then again have no idea about pretty much everything relating to this case.

Well, if WDFW knew where it was you can bet it would be seized.  I'm not assuming anything other than that.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Colville on June 23, 2016, 08:20:09 AM
No one needs to find this stuff.  The judge could order them surrendered at any time as evidence.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: OutHouse on June 23, 2016, 08:24:07 AM
Why?

What kind of evidence is that?

The exact bull and the exact location are not at issue in this case.

Because the prosecutor has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a bull was in fact killed. Now, officer/witness testimony might be enough. However, If I was a juror and they couldn't show me the body/head/antlers there could be doubt that a bull was even killed. It also depends on what the defendant told the officers---his admissions could prove the death as well. I don't know all the facts, admittedly.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 724wd on June 23, 2016, 08:39:19 AM
He killed a tame bull in a farmer's field--that one sentence says it all.

that sentence means nothing!  It's the one about the unit not being open to branch antler elk that's the good one!   :tup:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 2MANY on June 23, 2016, 09:29:22 AM
If Bullwinkle identified as a cow would it be legal to shoot it in the unit hunted?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on June 23, 2016, 09:35:31 AM
If Bullwinkle identified as a cow would it be legal to shoot it in the unit hunted?
I believe this defense is on the table, not their first choice but I think it is an option if they get to that point.  :chuckle:

I am glad that this is actually moving pretty quickly now. Another hearing next month and possibly a trial days after that.  If I had to bet money on this I would say it gets settled in the next month and they finalize it all at the July 26th hearing.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Whitpirate on June 23, 2016, 09:36:33 AM
If Bullwinkle identified as a cow would it be legal to shoot it in the unit hunted?

Not with the tag in question.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on June 23, 2016, 09:41:18 AM
If Bullwinkle identified as a cow would it be legal to shoot it in the unit hunted?

Not with the tag in question.
Would he have to identify as a spike?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on June 23, 2016, 09:46:28 AM
He'd have to identify unit 334 as another unit like 328.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JimmyHoffa on June 23, 2016, 09:50:38 AM
If Bullwinkle identified as a cow would it be legal to shoot it in the unit hunted?

Not with the tag in question.
:yeah:  It's not a question of what kind of animal would be legal, that tag just plain isn't good for anything in that GMU.  The argument a few pages back about what makes a spike vs a branch antler bull would only be a valid argument for the general season tag, not the raffle tag. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bob33 on June 23, 2016, 09:55:35 AM
If Bullwinkle identified as a cow would it be legal to shoot it in the unit hunted?

Not with the tag in question.
Would he have to identify as a spike?

"(a) Bag limit: One additional any bull elk..."
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 2MANY on June 23, 2016, 09:59:41 AM
So transgender elk have the same rights as people?
Title: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bobcat on June 23, 2016, 10:05:07 AM
The raffle tag wasn't valid in that unit. Period.

It's no different than if he had used the same tag on a bull elk in Arizona.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 2MANY on June 23, 2016, 10:25:48 AM
I get it.

I don't believe in transgender either.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on June 23, 2016, 10:32:44 AM
The raffle tag wasn't valid in that unit. Period.

It's no different than if he had used the same tag on a bull elk in Arizona.
So the entire unit would have to self identify as 328, that might be a bit of a stretch.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bob33 on June 23, 2016, 11:26:20 AM
The raffle tag wasn't valid in that unit. Period.

It's no different than if he had used the same tag on a bull elk in Arizona.
So the entire unit would have to self identify as 328, that might be a bit of a stretch.
What if the bull self identified as a spike that day?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bobcat on June 23, 2016, 11:57:58 AM

The raffle tag wasn't valid in that unit. Period.

It's no different than if he had used the same tag on a bull elk in Arizona.
So the entire unit would have to self identify as 328, that might be a bit of a stretch.
What if the bull self identified as a spike that day?

Wouldn't matter, it would still be dead.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: DaveMonti on June 23, 2016, 12:04:18 PM
Hey!  Welcome Back Everyone!!!  What's this thread about???
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on June 23, 2016, 12:22:56 PM
Hey!  Welcome Back Everyone!!!  What's this thread about???
It appears as though a branched antler bull was killed in a closed unit using a raffle tag.

These are the facts, they can't be disputed.  There is a bunch of other sidenotes but those can't be confirmed at this time.  There is a pending court case, not sure that will clear anything up though.

Way to stir the pot Dave. :stirthepot:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on June 23, 2016, 12:26:24 PM
Just a bunch of jealousy.  ;)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: DaveMonti on June 23, 2016, 12:36:23 PM
Hey!  Welcome Back Everyone!!!  What's this thread about???
It appears as though a branched antler bull was killed in a closed unit using a raffle tag.

These are the facts, they can't be disputed.  There is a bunch of other sidenotes but those can't be confirmed at this time.  There is a pending court case, not sure that will clear anything up though.

Way to stir the pot Dave. :stirthepot:

Oh, THAT story.  The poor guy has cancer!  Leave him alone already!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on June 23, 2016, 12:40:39 PM
Hey!  Welcome Back Everyone!!!  What's this thread about???
It appears as though a branched antler bull was killed in a closed unit using a raffle tag.

These are the facts, they can't be disputed.  There is a bunch of other sidenotes but those can't be confirmed at this time.  There is a pending court case, not sure that will clear anything up though.

Way to stir the pot Dave. :stirthepot:

Oh, THAT story.  The poor guy has cancer!  Leave him alone already!
Yep, same story, we just keep moving it around to keep it fresh.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on June 23, 2016, 01:26:00 PM
Ok, what if the bull self-identified as a cow, the entire unit self- identified as a private high fence operation, the teg self-identified as a "shoot a cow for free" coupon and the hunter self-identified as a tomato.

Would that appease the crowd??

Tolerance, people.   Tolerance.....
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on June 23, 2016, 01:32:23 PM
What if TR self identifies as a Native American?   :dunno:  He should try that one in court. :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on June 23, 2016, 01:46:25 PM
Are we going to have to move this back to off topics?  :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: DaveMonti on June 23, 2016, 02:01:49 PM
One thing is for sure:

Most (NOT ALL!!!) participants in this particular thread self identify as Judge, Jury, and Executioner.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bob33 on June 23, 2016, 02:04:19 PM
One thing is for sure:

Most (NOT ALL!!!) participants in this particular thread self identify as Judge, Jury, and Executioner.
That sounds a little judgmental to me.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on June 23, 2016, 02:20:11 PM
LOL
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Gringo31 on June 23, 2016, 02:22:15 PM
 :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: DaveMonti on June 23, 2016, 02:51:05 PM
I'm not really a judgmental person.  I only self identify as one.  I'm clearly a victim of my own self identification.  Therefore, nobody can judge me. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bearpaw on June 23, 2016, 03:11:56 PM
What if TR self identifies as a Native American?   :dunno:  He should try that one in court. :chuckle:

 :chuckle: :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on June 23, 2016, 05:14:38 PM
What if TR self identifies as a Native American?   :dunno:  He should try that one in court. :chuckle:

 :chuckle: :chuckle:

Stop laughing at my uncle... :'( it's not funny  >:( he's a muck okay, he can hunt there as long as a Yakama don't catch him. :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: teanawayslayer on June 23, 2016, 05:26:44 PM
What if TR self identifies as a Native American?   :dunno:  He should try that one in court. :chuckle:

 :chuckle: :chuckle:

Stop laughing at my uncle... :'( it's not funny  >:( he's a muck okay, he can hunt there as long as a Yakama don't catch him. :chuckle:
:chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: popeshawnpaul on June 23, 2016, 05:29:47 PM
No one needs to find this stuff.  The judge could order them surrendered at any time as evidence.

No, the judge can't unless convicted and he admits he possesses them.  Can you imagine in an illegal possession of a gun case the judge ordering someone to give them the gun and evidence? 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: teanawayslayer on June 23, 2016, 05:50:08 PM
No one needs to find this stuff.  The judge could order them surrendered at any time as evidence.

No, the judge can't unless convicted and he admits he possesses them.  Can you imagine in an illegal possession of a gun case the judge ordering someone to give them the gun and evidence?
i would imagine they would be at the taxi like most trophy's. Kinda hard to give them up if there not in your possession. :dunno:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Ghost Hunter on June 23, 2016, 07:19:47 PM
No one needs to find this stuff.  The judge could order them surrendered at any time as evidence.

No, the judge can't unless convicted and he admits he possesses them.  Can you imagine in an illegal possession of a gun case the judge ordering someone to give them the gun and evidence?
i would imagine they would be at the taxi like most trophy's. Kinda hard to give them up if there not in your possession. :dunno:
Something about a guy that has to hide his bone... :peep:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JJB11B on June 23, 2016, 07:22:06 PM
I'll bet he drives a chevy
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: predatorpro on June 23, 2016, 07:40:17 PM
Hopefully the judge is a member here so he can get the facts from this thread and make a good judgement without even giving him a day in court! :dunno:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on June 23, 2016, 07:41:53 PM
What if TR self identifies as a Native American?   :dunno:  He should try that one in court. :chuckle:

 :chuckle: :chuckle:

Stop laughing at my uncle... :'( it's not funny  >:( he's a muck okay, he can hunt there as long as a Yakama don't catch him. :chuckle:

Hey I want in on this plat.

We're blood brothers, you're from the Marine tribe, I'm from the Naval Tribe. So you can get me in on the land side of hunting all creatures, I can get you in all fisheries side of the house, plus water mammals hunting.  :tup:  :chuckle:

No judge can stop us, to hell with all the rules were NDNs.  :lol4: :peep:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: NOCK NOCK on June 23, 2016, 08:34:19 PM
What if TR self identifies as a Native American?   :dunno:  He should try that one in court. :chuckle:

 :chuckle: :chuckle:

Stop laughing at my uncle... :'( it's not funny  >:( he's a muck okay, he can hunt there as long as a Yakama don't catch him. :chuckle:

Hey I want in on this plat.

We're blood brothers, you're from the Marine tribe, I'm from the Naval Tribe. So you can get me in on the land side of hunting all creatures, I can get you in all fisheries side of the house, plus water mammals hunting.  :tup:  :chuckle:

No judge can stop us, to hell with all the rules were NDNs.  :lol4: :peep:


Boss, I thought you were from the Aviator tribe, that would make you a half breed if your from the Naval tribe.
Pretty good combo you got there.  :tup:  :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on June 23, 2016, 08:36:58 PM
What if TR self identifies as a Native American?   :dunno:  He should try that one in court. :chuckle:

 :chuckle: :chuckle:

Stop laughing at my uncle... :'( it's not funny  >:( he's a muck okay, he can hunt there as long as a Yakama don't catch him. :chuckle:

Hey I want in on this plat.

We're blood brothers, you're from the Marine tribe, I'm from the Naval Tribe. So you can get me in on the land side of hunting all creatures, I can get you in all fisheries side of the house, plus water mammals hunting.  :tup:  :chuckle:

No judge can stop us, to hell with all the rules were NDNs.  :lol4: :peep:


Boss, I thought you were from the Aviator tribe, that would make you a half breed if your from the Naval tribe.
Pretty good combo you got there.  :tup:  :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle:

Naval Aviation Tribe, better scouting resources to find the elusive fish.  :tup:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: HUNTINCOUPLE on June 23, 2016, 09:17:06 PM
What if TR self identifies as a Native American?   :dunno:  He should try that one in court. :chuckle:



LMAO
 :chuckle:

 :chuckle: :chuckle:

Stop laughing at my uncle... :'( it's not funny  >:( he's a muck okay, he can hunt there as long as a Yakama don't catch him. :chuckle:




LMAO

 :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 2MANY on June 24, 2016, 09:19:26 AM
I had know idea that this case involved bone hiding, tee pee creeping, or Chevy trucks.

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on June 24, 2016, 09:27:47 AM
What unit was this bull shot in?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: teanawayslayer on June 24, 2016, 09:30:43 AM
What unit was this bull shot in?
sheep unit 19. :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: DaveMonti on June 24, 2016, 09:34:43 AM
What truck was the elk driving at the time?  I heard it was a dodge, but now I'm hearing a Chevy?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 2MANY on June 24, 2016, 09:37:42 AM
Dodge trucks are the best selling truck in Seattle.      LOL

Ram Tough!!

That being said elk aren't Bullish on them.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on June 24, 2016, 05:22:15 PM
 :o who's tipi-creepin'???
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on June 24, 2016, 05:26:11 PM
:o who's tipi-creepin'???

I'm sure lots of good things came from tipi creepin. :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on June 24, 2016, 08:04:57 PM
I heard this bull was shot with a muzzleloader, so it's ok.

You can all go about your business.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on June 24, 2016, 08:16:10 PM
I heard this bull was shot with a muzzleloader, so it's ok.

You can all go about your business.

Geeezzzz, why didn't you tell us that 55 pages ago.  :hunt2:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on June 25, 2016, 12:15:32 AM
I heard this bull was shot with a muzzleloader, so it's ok.

You can all go about your business.

Geeezzzz, why didn't you tell us that 55 pages ago.  :hunt2:

You mean 2 threads ago
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on June 25, 2016, 12:26:01 AM
I heard this bull was shot with a muzzleloader, so it's ok.

You can all go about your business.

Geeezzzz, why didn't you tell us that 55 pages ago.  :hunt2:

You mean 2 threads ago

Sorry.   I was busy researching which cel phone carrier was used to make the call.

I want the cel tower seized as evidence!!!!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: teegansdad on June 25, 2016, 08:23:03 AM
I'm on the jurey for this  :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: CAMPMEAT on June 25, 2016, 08:41:10 AM
Hopefully the judge is a member here so he can get the facts from this thread and make a good judgement without even giving him a day in court! :dunno:




Good one Vince.....so true about this site !
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on June 25, 2016, 10:02:08 AM
Honestly,  it's the muzzleloader companies fault for the death of this majestic pet so did somebody file a civil suit yet against the company? If they had created a weapon of mass destruction this beautiful pet would still be alive. :rolleyes: :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: RELV on June 25, 2016, 10:22:44 AM
We need to close the muzzle loader loophole.  You can be on the NO FLY LIST and still buy a Hawken Plains Rifle.  The same dangerous rifle Liver Eating Johnson used!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on June 25, 2016, 12:01:31 PM
When I fired a .50 Cal muzzleloader I was in a state of shock and overcome with a case of temporary ptsd...my shoulder was sore, ears ringing and the smoke had this blinding affect...I knew then and there, that these  weapons of mass destruction,  these pet killers need to be outlawed and a sit - in needs to occur with our elected officials. >:(
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: emac on June 25, 2016, 12:30:37 PM
Man this thread is turning into bigfoot thread 102

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on June 25, 2016, 02:39:00 PM
In your dreams.

This topic will never achieve the seriosity of the Big Foot thread.    >:(
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: DaveMonti on June 25, 2016, 03:36:48 PM
This thread, by itself, not even considering the multiple other threads on the subject that have been deleted, is clearly more legendary, relevant, and intellectual than the bigfoot thread.  It's in a league all it's own.  This, I declare.   :whoo:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on June 25, 2016, 04:50:39 PM
This thread, by itself, not even considering the multiple other threads on the subject that have been deleted, is clearly more legendary, relevant, and intellectual than the bigfoot thread.  It's in a league all it's own.  This, I declare.   :whoo:

Your not of declaring birth right, so your statement is null and void! ;) >:( >:(

Long live the BIGGIE THREAD! ;) >:( >:( >:(
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: deerhunter_98520 on June 26, 2016, 07:34:06 PM
I've stayed off this thread but now I may have to get involved  >:(
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: NOCK NOCK on June 27, 2016, 10:15:49 AM
I've stayed off this thread but now I may have to get involved  >:(

Is that because TR was actually a BF in disguise.....How dare they try to prosecute a biggie.  :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on June 27, 2016, 12:59:38 PM
He very well could be...He has done his part just like a biggie to cull the elk herds of the trophy bulls. But....I believe deerhunter_98520 is stepping into the ring as some have attempted to say this sorry excuse of a topic is any where near the factual, undisputed seriousness, undebatable topic as the BF thread. >:(
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: NOCK NOCK on June 27, 2016, 03:30:44 PM
anxiously waiting for his reply then.  :tung: >:( :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: splitshot on June 27, 2016, 04:33:51 PM
  this reichert guy sounds like a bully to me.  jmho   mike w
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: deerhunter_98520 on June 27, 2016, 04:56:31 PM
He very well could be...He has done his part just like a biggie to cull the elk herds of the trophy bulls. But....I believe deerhunter_98520 is stepping into the ring as some have attempted to say this sorry excuse of a topic is any where near the factual, undisputed seriousness, undebatable topic as the BF thread. >:(

This thread will get out of control quick if I start in on it...I better just sit back from a distance with my spotting scope and keep this thread serious and on track  >:(
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on June 27, 2016, 05:04:25 PM
LOL.

I mean....     >:( >:( >:(
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on June 27, 2016, 05:33:31 PM
 :yeah:

 >:( >:( >:(
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on June 27, 2016, 05:41:09 PM
:yeah:

 >:( >:( >:(

Here is a serious thread

http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,197550.msg2622770/topicseen.html#new

You could shoot your eye out. :yike:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on June 27, 2016, 11:50:39 PM
 I read the case report and officers notes, sounds like Reichert is now going to be going with the "ignorance defense".

 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Alchase on June 28, 2016, 09:58:08 AM
I read the case report and officers notes, sounds like Reichert is now going to be going with the "ignorance defense".

 

Could it be posted?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on June 28, 2016, 10:17:34 AM
I read the case report and officers notes, sounds like Reichert is now going to be going with the "ignorance defense".

 

Could it be posted?

Not sure that's something Dale is going to want. Please don't for now. I'll report back.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on June 28, 2016, 10:28:16 AM
I read the case report and officers notes, sounds like Reichert is now going to be going with the "ignorance defense".

 

Could it be posted?

Not sure that's something Dale is going to want. Please don't for now. I'll report back.
:yeah:
There is a second court date set, I think it is July 26th then a trial date has been set for the beginning of August.

My guess is they will make a deal before the July date, go in front of the judge on the 26th and present the deal to the judge, judge will agree and it will be all over.

Whatever is in that report will just muddy the waters before the next court date.

I think it is best at this point to just let the court system run its course and see what happens.  All of the facts are out there a decision just needs to be made.

He has two big ticket tags coming up for this next season and with the restrictions in place he has to get this cleared up to move forward with those hunts. This thing isn't going to drag out.  We will all know soon enough what the verdict is and then can debate it at length.

Posting the report in my opinion would just create a bunch of headaches for the site owner.  :twocents:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on June 28, 2016, 10:40:13 AM
I read the case report and officers notes, sounds like Reichert is now going to be going with the "ignorance defense".

 

Could it be posted?

Not sure that's something Dale is going to want. Please don't for now. I'll report back.
:yeah:
There is a second court date set, I think it is July 26th then a trial date has been set for the beginning of August.

My guess is they will make a deal before the July date, go in front of the judge on the 26th and present the deal to the judge, judge will agree and it will be all over.

Whatever is in that report will just muddy the waters before the next court date.

I think it is best at this point to just let the court system run its course and see what happens.  All of the facts are out there a decision just needs to be made.

He has two big ticket tags coming up for this next season and with the restrictions in place he has to get this cleared up to move forward with those hunts. This thing isn't going to drag out.  We will all know soon enough what the verdict is and then can debate it at length.

Posting the report in my opinion would just create a bunch of headaches for the site owner.  :twocents:

I agree. I don't want to do anything that might jeopardize anything.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on June 28, 2016, 04:15:52 PM
I read the case report and officers notes, sounds like Reichert is now going to be going with the "ignorance defense".

Epic tease, kinda like a high school girl at a dance. :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on June 28, 2016, 04:54:56 PM
I read the case report and officers notes, sounds like Reichert is now going to be going with the "ignorance defense".

Epic tease, kinda like a high school girl at a dance. :chuckle:

Not even close. Tell me if you've heard this, "I've got pics but can't share them..." then goes on to describe said pics like we care cuz it's not the same.  :dunno: :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on June 28, 2016, 05:20:38 PM
I read the case report and officers notes, sounds like Reichert is now going to be going with the "ignorance defense".

Epic tease, kinda like a high school girl at a dance. :chuckle:

Not even close. Tell me if you've heard this, "I've got pics but can't share them..." then goes on to describe said pics like we care cuz it's not the same.  :dunno: :chuckle:

 :chuckle: "Excuse me while I take this report over and scan it so I can share it on huntwa."

Yeah, that's gonna fly. :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on June 28, 2016, 05:27:18 PM
This whole issue is like a gun free zone.....
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on June 28, 2016, 05:38:01 PM
This whole issue is like a gun free zone.....

  :chuckle:

 Basically it's as many theorized a while back, acknowledging that there likely was a call made to WDFW asking about weapon legality and various other irrelevant excuses, but avoiding asking the only pertinent question, could they kill a branched antler bull in 334.

 It's up to the judge now to decide if Reichert, being told by those guys he was "good to go", is guilty or not. :dunno:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: boneaddict on June 28, 2016, 05:42:55 PM
How many muzzleloaders does it take to kill a pet bull in the field?  Lol
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: grundy53 on June 28, 2016, 05:48:03 PM
How many muzzleloaders does it take to kill a pet bull in the field?  Lol
:chuckle:

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on June 28, 2016, 05:53:03 PM
How many muzzleloaders does it take to kill a pet bull in the field?  Lol
:chuckle:

Being the guy probably doesn't load them himself had his minions hold 4 or 5 in the background at the ready for him. :o
Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bob33 on June 28, 2016, 05:54:03 PM
How many muzzleloaders does it take to kill a pet bull in the field?  Lol
:chuckle:

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk
You have to insure it drops quickly so it won't run into a closed GMU.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on June 28, 2016, 05:55:31 PM
Wait.......    was this bull shot with a muzzle loader????

That changes the entire gun free zone argument.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on June 28, 2016, 06:04:11 PM
How many muzzleloaders does it take to kill a pet bull in the field?  Lol
:chuckle:
You have to insure it drops quickly so it won't run into a closed GMU.

 Don't you mean into a "open" GMU? :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: boneaddict on June 28, 2016, 06:09:12 PM
I-594

I wonder how that works.  I have to admit I've never utilized a gun bearer before.

"Transfers to hunters who are 18 and older are only exempt if they take place while engaged in hunting, and only if the firearm is possessed by the transferee solely in locations where hunting is permissible.”

Does that include an open unit?.... I mean closed unit.    Dang it Bob
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bob33 on June 28, 2016, 06:09:57 PM
How many muzzleloaders does it take to kill a pet bull in the field?  Lol
:chuckle:
You have to insure it drops quickly so it won't run into a closed GMU.

 Don't you mean into a "open" GMU? :chuckle:
;)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on June 28, 2016, 06:11:28 PM

Does that include an open unit?.... I mean closed unit.    Dang it Bob

 :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: emac on June 28, 2016, 06:11:38 PM
I-594

I wonder how that works.  I have to admit I've never utilized a gun bearer before.

"Transfers to hunters who are 18 and older are only exempt if they take place while engaged in hunting, and only if the firearm is possessed by the transferee solely in locations where hunting is permissible.”

Does that include an open unit?.... I mean closed unit.    Dang it Bob
Does 594 apply to muzzle-loaders since you don't need a background check when you buy one


Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: boneaddict on June 28, 2016, 06:14:14 PM
I honestly don't know emac.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Ghost Hunter on June 28, 2016, 06:16:29 PM
Ignorance is bliss and money is evil. :dunno: :rolleyes: :bash:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bearpaw on June 28, 2016, 06:18:37 PM
I-594

I wonder how that works.  I have to admit I've never utilized a gun bearer before.

"Transfers to hunters who are 18 and older are only exempt if they take place while engaged in hunting, and only if the firearm is possessed by the transferee solely in locations where hunting is permissible.”

Does that include an open unit?.... I mean closed unit.    Dang it Bob

I don't see how it applies!
Does 594 apply to muzzle-loaders since you don't need a background check when you buy one


Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: TVHunts on June 28, 2016, 06:36:43 PM
I-594

I wonder how that works.  I have to admit I've never utilized a gun bearer before.

"Transfers to hunters who are 18 and older are only exempt if they take place while engaged in hunting, and only if the firearm is possessed by the transferee solely in locations where hunting is permissible.”




Does that include an open unit?.... I mean closed unit.    Dang it Bob
Does 594 apply to muzzle-loaders since you don't need a background check when you buy one


Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk


I have an idea,   Let's call WDFW and ask them if we need to do a firearm transfer on a muzzle loader in order to shoot a branch antlered bull in a closed unit for branch antlered Bulls since the shooter doesn't own the muzzle loader? 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bob33 on June 28, 2016, 06:36:59 PM
In Washington muzzleloaders (except a few antiques) are considered firearms and are subject to I594 restrictions.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on June 28, 2016, 06:38:51 PM
Sounds like the first i594 case should be heard in court soon.  8)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: emac on June 28, 2016, 06:39:13 PM
In Washington muzzleloaders (except a few antiques) are considered firearms and are subject to I594 restrictions.
That is interesting. But you can still go on muzzle-loaders.com and order one to your door with out a background check, but then if you wanna sell it you got to get one.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bearpaw on June 28, 2016, 06:40:05 PM
In Washington muzzleloaders (except a few antiques) are considered firearms and are subject to I594 restrictions.

Thanks for clarification Bob, that's good for everyone to know, do you have a link to that info?  :tup:

TVHunts, that was a good one!  :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JimmyHoffa on June 28, 2016, 06:41:34 PM
I doubt 594 would apply, they could have shot coyotes with it legally in that area.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bob33 on June 28, 2016, 06:51:00 PM
In Washington muzzleloaders (except a few antiques) are considered firearms and are subject to I594 restrictions.

Thanks for clarification Bob, that's good for everyone to know, do you have a link to that info?  :tup:

TVHunts, that was a good one!  :chuckle:
The definition of a firearm is found here: http://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=9.41.010

"(9) "Firearm" means a weapon or device from which a projectile or projectiles may be fired by an explosive such as gunpowder."

A muzzleloading firearm meets that definition.

I-594 defines it the same way:

(9) "Firearm" means a weapon or device from which a projectile or projectiles may be fired by an explosive such as gunpowder.
http://sos.wa.gov/_assets/elections/initiatives/finaltext_483.pdf

Also, it is implied here:

http://wdfw.wa.gov/help/questions/92/Is+it+legal+to+use+pellet+guns,+air+guns,+or+sling+shots+to+harvest+game+birds%3F

"In Washington it is against the law to hunt game birds and game animals using anything other than a firearm (rifle, shotgun, handgun, muzzleloading firearm), a bow and arrow, crossbow, or by falconry. "

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: teanawayslayer on June 28, 2016, 06:55:13 PM
How would that work I was told tr rented the muzzleloader from a "friend". These local friends  should be ashamed about how they went about this whole ordeal. If I were tr I would ask my friends for my money back and then some. :twocents:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on June 28, 2016, 06:57:35 PM
OK, I have to break my silence.  So did he intend to go hunting w/a golf bag on a cart full of a half dozen capped and loaded shootin' irons? 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Alchase on June 28, 2016, 07:00:37 PM
I-594

I wonder how that works.  I have to admit I've never utilized a gun bearer before.

"Transfers to hunters who are 18 and older are only exempt if they take place while engaged in hunting, and only if the firearm is possessed by the transferee solely in locations where hunting is permissible.”

Does that include an open unit?.... I mean closed unit.    Dang it Bob


So he would need 4 or 5 transfers one for each guide I mean helper?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Alchase on June 28, 2016, 07:01:55 PM
OK, I have to break my silence.  So did he intend to go hunting w/a golf bag full of a half dozen capped and loaded shootin' irons? 

Apperently
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on June 28, 2016, 08:37:42 PM
How far did the bull travel after the first shot?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bob33 on June 28, 2016, 08:39:35 PM
How far did the bull travel after the first shot?
One whole GMU.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on June 28, 2016, 08:39:53 PM
Lol.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: boneaddict on June 28, 2016, 08:40:26 PM
Oh snap! 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on June 28, 2016, 08:49:17 PM
How far did the bull travel after the first shot?
One whole GMU.

 Lmao :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: NOCK NOCK on June 29, 2016, 06:26:08 AM
Here Kiti Kiti,
Here Kiti Kiti Kiti, where are you???
Seems that HW has lost our Kiti.  :dunno:
Maybe his 257 backfired and went boom
 :dunno: :chuckle: 8)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: predatorpro on June 29, 2016, 06:58:21 AM
I'd like to know what everyone would do if they were in a similar situation? Would u fight it? What happened to innocent until proven guilty? To me it sounds like they made an attempt to do it legally. Was it intentional or un intentional?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: WAPatriot on June 29, 2016, 07:01:42 AM
How many people on this thread harvested an elk last year. I'm thinking most of you guys are just internet jockey s who like hunters to get black eyes in media. My question is for JD and tennawayslayer and davemonti when's the last time you guys shot an elk?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: WAPatriot on June 29, 2016, 07:05:05 AM
I'd like to know what everyone would do if they were in a similar situation? Would u fight it? What happened to innocent until proven guilty? To me it sounds like they made an attempt to do it legally. Was it intentional or un intentional?

Exactly most of these guys pumped hunters are getting a bad rap. Hunters need to unite and stand up for one another. I'm pretty sure these s a few anti s on here stiring the pot.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: fishngamereaper on June 29, 2016, 07:06:54 AM
I'd like to know what everyone would do if they were in a similar situation? Would u fight it? What happened to innocent until proven guilty? To me it sounds like they made an attempt to do it legally. Was it intentional or un intentional?

I wouldn't shoot a tame bull, and I wouldn't violate clearly written rules to kill an elk. So I would never be in "that" situation.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: fishngamereaper on June 29, 2016, 07:10:09 AM
How many people on this thread harvested an elk last year. I'm thinking most of you guys are just internet jockey s who like hunters to get black eyes in media. My question is for JD and tennawayslayer and davemonti when's the last time you guys shot an elk?

I'm going three years strong with legally harvested elk. But why does that matter. Everyone is entitled to an opinion. They shouldn't be labeled internet jockeys. I thinking your painting with a broad brush.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on June 29, 2016, 07:21:24 AM
I'd like to know what everyone would do if they were in a similar situation? Would u fight it? What happened to innocent until proven guilty? To me it sounds like they made an attempt to do it legally. Was it intentional or un intentional?
I wouldn't put myself in that situation to begin with. I'd read the reg's, see the unit was off limits to me(It's clear as daylight that the GMU is closed to branch antlered bulls. There's nothing confusing or misleading at all about it) and hunt somewhere else.

I'd like to know what everyone would do if they were in a similar situation? Would u fight it? What happened to innocent until proven guilty? To me it sounds like they made an attempt to do it legally. Was it intentional or un intentional?

Exactly most of these guys pumped hunters are getting a bad rap. Hunters need to unite and stand up for one another. I'm pretty sure these s a few anti s on here stiring the pot.

I don't stand up for any hunters who kill elk or anything else illegally.


Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: boneaddict on June 29, 2016, 07:25:04 AM
 :yeah:    Times 10. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: boneaddict on June 29, 2016, 07:27:56 AM
And just a note, just because you kill something, or buy an animal it doesn't make you a "Hunter".   
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: teanawayslayer on June 29, 2016, 07:30:50 AM
How many people on this thread harvested an elk last year. I'm thinking most of you guys are just internet jockey s who like hunters to get black eyes in media. My question is for JD and tennawayslayer and davemonti when's the last time you guys shot an elk?
two years ago with my peaches tag. I have had a cow tag for the past three seasons and have chose to help other people on there hunts instead of harvesting an elk myself. I have a buddy who has one of the most desired rut tags in the state in the state this year. So I will eat another cow tag  :chuckle: Not that I owe you an explanation. But there it is.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: WAPatriot on June 29, 2016, 07:56:35 AM
How many people on this thread harvested an elk last year. I'm thinking most of you guys are just internet jockey s who like hunters to get black eyes in media. My question is for JD and tennawayslayer and davemonti when's the last time you guys shot an elk?
two years ago with my peaches tag. I have had a cow tag for the past three seasons and have chose to help other people on there hunts instead of harvesting an elk myself. I have a buddy who has one of the most desired rut tags in the state in the state this year. So I will eat another cow tag  :chuckle: Not that I owe you an explanation. But there it is.

So you only actually hunt elk when you draw bull/quality tag. Explains why you are so jealous of TR. also I think TR s lawyer needs to look into see if any of the landowners in 334 have bull nuisance tags. I know one guy who gets 5 bull tags a year.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: WAPatriot on June 29, 2016, 07:58:01 AM
And just a note, just because you kill something, or buy an animal it doesn't make you a "Hunter".

Does in my book. Same thing with fishing if you aren't catching it's just a boat ride.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on June 29, 2016, 08:11:59 AM
How many people on this thread harvested an elk last year. I'm thinking most of you guys are just internet jockey s who like hunters to get black eyes in media. My question is for JD and tennawayslayer and davemonti when's the last time you guys shot an elk?

2015
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: teanawayslayer on June 29, 2016, 08:17:04 AM
How many people on this thread harvested an elk last year. I'm thinking most of you guys are just internet jockey s who like hunters to get black eyes in media. My question is for JD and tennawayslayer and davemonti when's the last time you guys shot an elk?
two years ago with my peaches tag. I have had a cow tag for the past three seasons and have chose to help other people on there hunts instead of harvesting an elk myself. I have a buddy who has one of the most desired rut tags in the state in the state this year. So I will eat another cow tag  :chuckle: Not that I owe you an explanation. But there it is.

So you only actually hunt elk when you draw bull/quality tag. Explains why you are so jealous of TR. also I think TR s lawyer needs to look into see if any of the landowners in 334 have bull nuisance tags. I know one guy who gets 5 bull tags a year.
no I hunt for elk every year. It's just not always for my tag. I get more enjoyment out of helping people than harvesting myself. If tr would have asked for my help he probably would have gotten it free of charge.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: pianoman9701 on June 29, 2016, 08:22:49 AM
How many people on this thread harvested an elk last year. I'm thinking most of you guys are just internet jockey s who like hunters to get black eyes in media. My question is for JD and tennawayslayer and davemonti when's the last time you guys shot an elk?

You sound desperate and severely lacking in ethics - personal opinion. It makes no difference when someone last shot an elk. It matters when they last purchased a license, hunted for anything, and did it legally and ethically. A vast majority of people posting on this forum (and it seems most on this thread), favor and support legal hunting, even without being able to afford a $50K tag. Many of us also don't mind the auction and lotto tags because of their conservation value. What we find abhorrent are people who, some because of their wealth or position, ignore hunting laws as if they're above them. I personally also find those who justify the illegal actions of poachers as abhorrent.  Cast all of the dispersion you wish. Your position is untenable.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: boneaddict on June 29, 2016, 08:27:14 AM
And just a note, just because you kill something, or buy an animal it doesn't make you a "Hunter".

Does in my book. Same thing with fishing if you aren't catching it's just a boat ride.
That explains some things.   :rolleyes:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: pianoman9701 on June 29, 2016, 08:31:16 AM
 :yeah: Sure does.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on June 29, 2016, 08:41:40 AM
How many people on this thread harvested an elk last year. I'm thinking most of you guys are just internet jockey s who like hunters to get black eyes in media. My question is for JD and tennawayslayer and davemonti when's the last time you guys shot an elk?
two years ago with my peaches tag. I have had a cow tag for the past three seasons and have chose to help other people on there hunts instead of harvesting an elk myself. I have a buddy who has one of the most desired rut tags in the state in the state this year. So I will eat another cow tag  :chuckle: Not that I owe you an explanation. But there it is.

So you only actually hunt elk when you draw bull/quality tag. Explains why you are so jealous of TR. also I think TR s lawyer needs to look into see if any of the landowners in 334 have bull nuisance tags. I know one guy who gets 5 bull tags a year.
And just a note, just because you kill something, or buy an animal it doesn't make you a "Hunter".

Does in my book. Same thing with fishing if you aren't catching it's just a boat ride.

Wow...that's all I got.

I haven't even tried to kill an elk in the last 3-4 years. I prefer deer and I've been busy with family and life stuff. Where does that put me?
:yike:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Woodchuck on June 29, 2016, 08:44:03 AM
City Slicker
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bearpaw on June 29, 2016, 08:50:45 AM
I don't think these testosterone type of public discussions about who is more of a hunter are good for hunting. Essentially anyone who buys a hunting license is a "hunter"! Some hunters depending on their experience and/or available time, connections, or simple luck may be more successful than others, but we are all hunters if we buy a hunting license and follow the law!  :twocents:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: WAPatriot on June 29, 2016, 08:57:02 AM
How many people on this thread harvested an elk last year. I'm thinking most of you guys are just internet jockey s who like hunters to get black eyes in media. My question is for JD and tennawayslayer and davemonti when's the last time you guys shot an elk?

You sound desperate and severely lacking in ethics - personal opinion. It makes no difference when someone last shot an elk. It matters when they last purchased a license, hunted for anything, and did it legally and ethically. A vast majority of people posting on this forum (and it seems most on this thread), favor and support legal hunting, even without being able to afford a $50K tag. Many of us also don't mind the auction and lotto tags because of their conservation value. What we find abhorrent are people who, some because of their wealth or position, ignore hunting laws as if they're above them. I personally also find those who justify the illegal actions of poachers as abhorrent.  Cast all of the dispersion you wish. Your position is untenable.


Lol inoccent until proven guilty.  Also it does matter when the last time someone kills an elk its says a lot about them. Me I'm a killer I shot a little calf this year. Sweetest meat of all time it was light pink not even red. Put that in your ethics pipe and smoke it.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on June 29, 2016, 09:06:11 AM
I don't think these testosterone type of public discussions about who is more of a hunter are good for hunting. Essentially anyone who buys a hunting license is a "hunter"! Some hunters depending on their experience and/or available time, connections, or simple luck may be more successful than others, but we are all hunters if we buy a hunting license and follow the law!  :twocents:
:yeah:
And additionally and more importantly I think we are conservationists.  The money from licensing and hunting equipment goes to wildlife management.  All wildlife, not just wild game.  People who take game illegally are stealing opportunity from those that follow the rules.  I could get a deer or elk every year if I broke the rules.  What's the difference between shooting a deer 15 minutes after hunting hours or in February?

We need people to buy licenses and tags to have the opportunity to harvest an animal.  With out them we don't have any money for wildlife management.  When people poach and take that opportunity away there is less opportunity for those hunting legally.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: WAPatriot on June 29, 2016, 09:08:36 AM
Or for that matter what if someone's arrow only weights 420 grams instead of the the legal 430 grams
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on June 29, 2016, 09:19:59 AM
Or for that matter what if someone's arrow only weights 420 grams instead of the the legal 430 grams
My guess is most if caught with an arrow 10 grams under weight would argue that it was a simple mistake but take the ticket and move on if the officer wrote them up.  They might take it to court and try to get it reduced but in the end technically they broke the rules.

Hunting the old muzzleloader 911 years ago someone pushed a herd of elk out of the ML911 area across the road we were driving out on.  The elk stopped on the left side of the road and we didn't shoot.  The elk were out of the area by 60 feet.  Could we have shot and said we shot on the correct side of the road and it died on the opposite side?  Yes, but if we were going to do that why wouldn't we just shoot one way out of bounds and out of everyone's view?  Same thing, out of bounds is out of bounds.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on June 29, 2016, 09:22:06 AM
Or for that matter what if someone's arrow only weights 420 grams instead of the the legal 430 grams

 Wait, it's a minimum 430gr now?

 When did they change it from 6gr. per pound of draw weight?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: WAPatriot on June 29, 2016, 09:23:34 AM
Or for that matter what if someone's arrow only weights 420 grams instead of the the legal 430 grams

 Wait, it's a minimum 430gr now?

 When did they change it from 6gr. per pound of draw weight?

No just an example
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: WAPatriot on June 29, 2016, 09:25:10 AM
Or for that matter what if someone's arrow only weights 420 grams instead of the the legal 430 grams
My guess is most if caught with an arrow 10 grams under weight would argue that it was a simple mistake but take the ticket and move on if the officer wrote them up.  They might take it to court and try to get it reduced but in the end technically they broke the rules.

Hunting the old muzzleloader 911 years ago someone pushed a herd of elk out of the ML911 area across the road we were driving out on.  The elk stopped on the left side of the road and we didn't shoot.  The elk were out of the area by 60 feet.  Could we have shot and said we shot on the correct side of the road and it died on the opposite side?  Yes, but if we were going to do that why wouldn't we just shoot one way out of bounds and out of everyone's view?  Same thing, out of bounds is out of bounds.

Would it be ethical if you shot an elk in a legal area but it was injured and ran into a non leagal area to finish it off.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on June 29, 2016, 09:26:54 AM
I'd say TR is definitely not innocent.  He shot an elk in a closed unit.  That is an undisputed fact. 

Now, whether or not he ends up having to pay the price for the crime is another thing.  By calling wdfw and asking about firearm restrictions in the Ellensburg unit, they did cast a gray area on the case.  They may have found a scapegoat in the wdfw employee that answered their question about being ok to shoot an elk with a muzzleloader.

I guess the question that a judge or jury will likely have to think about is whether TR and his accomplices knew the rules and were just trying to find a way around them by calling wdfw and hoping to get someone that didn't know the specific rules for that permit. 

They might also have to think about how the rules are worded.  I do think it would leave less room for confusion when the rules didn't say "Any 300 or 500 series GMU open to elk hunting, except GMU's not open to branch antlered bull elk hunting".  Instead, why not just list the couple of GMU's that are off-limits?  That would help the officers being called and asked the question instead of them having to look for 20 minutes to see if there are any branch bull hunting in the unit.

I would think he would have a decent chance at being found not guilty in court.  But I wouldn't bet on it either. :twocents:  And even if he is found not guilty sure doesn't mean he is innocent........just means the court found mitigating circumstances to let him get away with it.

(That's my 2 cents.  I'm nobody though, so my 2 cents is not worth much.  My opinion is only based on what I've read on the court of Hunt-Wa and Incident Report by WDFW).  And BTW - I'm in no way jealous.....not the least bit jealous in any way.  Just an interesting case to me so I'm following along.)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: boneaddict on June 29, 2016, 09:27:36 AM

Quote
Would it be ethical if you shot an elk in a legal area but it was injured and ran into a non leagal area to finish it off.

Is that what happened here, or did it get loaded into a truck and moved to an open unit.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: BULLBLASTER on June 29, 2016, 09:29:06 AM
Or for that matter what if someone's arrow only weights 420 grams instead of the the legal 430 grams
Can you explain why anyone would or could want to hunt with a 6600 grain arrow?  :dunno:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on June 29, 2016, 09:30:58 AM
When did they go to grams?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on June 29, 2016, 09:31:13 AM
Or for that matter what if someone's arrow only weights 420 grams instead of the the legal 430 grams

 Wait, it's a minimum 430gr now?

 When did they change it from 6gr. per pound of draw weight?

No just an example

 In that case, one could argue that the arrow was correct weight when you exited your nice wam vehicle and stepped out into the cold. While warm your bow limbs were more limber, creating 70 pounds of pull, but as the day cooled they became increasingly stiffer, sending your draw weight to 71.5lbs, thus the 10gr difference. ;)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on June 29, 2016, 09:31:47 AM
Or for that matter what if someone's arrow only weights 420 grams instead of the the legal 430 grams
My guess is most if caught with an arrow 10 grams under weight would argue that it was a simple mistake but take the ticket and move on if the officer wrote them up.  They might take it to court and try to get it reduced but in the end technically they broke the rules.

Hunting the old muzzleloader 911 years ago someone pushed a herd of elk out of the ML911 area across the road we were driving out on.  The elk stopped on the left side of the road and we didn't shoot.  The elk were out of the area by 60 feet.  Could we have shot and said we shot on the correct side of the road and it died on the opposite side?  Yes, but if we were going to do that why wouldn't we just shoot one way out of bounds and out of everyone's view?  Same thing, out of bounds is out of bounds.

Would it be ethical if you shot an elk in a legal area but it was injured and ran into a non leagal area to finish it off.
What we teach in hunter education is to call enforcement and let them know what has happened before entering the closed area.  Way easier to explain what happened and much more believable when you call versus having someone else report seeing you in a closed area and then trying to explain to enforcement what happened.  Same applies if you shoot it on private/public land that you have access to and it dies on private land that you don't have access to.  Call enforcement.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: WAPatriot on June 29, 2016, 09:35:28 AM
Or for that matter what if someone's arrow only weights 420 grams instead of the the legal 430 grams
My guess is most if caught with an arrow 10 grams under weight would argue that it was a simple mistake but take the ticket and move on if the officer wrote them up.  They might take it to court and try to get it reduced but in the end technically they broke the rules.

Hunting the old muzzleloader 911 years ago someone pushed a herd of elk out of the ML911 area across the road we were driving out on.  The elk stopped on the left side of the road and we didn't shoot.  The elk were out of the area by 60 feet.  Could we have shot and said we shot on the correct side of the road and it died on the opposite side?  Yes, but if we were going to do that why wouldn't we just shoot one way out of bounds and out of everyone's view?  Same thing, out of bounds is out of bounds.

Would it be ethical if you shot an elk in a legal area but it was injured and ran into a non leagal area to finish it off.
What we teach in hunter education is to call enforcement and let them know what has happened before entering the closed area.  Way easier to explain what happened and much more believable when you call versus having someone else report seeing you in a closed area and then trying to explain to enforcement what happened.  Same applies if you shoot it on private/public land that you have access to and it dies on private land that you don't have access to.  Call enforcement.

Call enforcement and ask them if it's legal
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on June 29, 2016, 09:35:57 AM
I'd say TR is definitely not innocent.  He shot an elk in a closed unit.  That is an undisputed fact. 

Now, whether or not he ends up having to pay the price for the crime is another thing.  By calling wdfw and asking about firearm restrictions in the Ellensburg unit, they did cast a gray area on the case.  They may have found a scapegoat in the wdfw employee that answered their question about being ok to shoot an elk with a muzzleloader.

I guess the question that a judge or jury will likely have to think about is whether TR and his accomplices knew the rules and were just trying to find a way around them by calling wdfw and hoping to get someone that didn't know the specific rules for that permit. 

They might also have to think about how the rules are worded.  I do think it would leave less room for confusion when the rules didn't say "Any 300 or 500 series GMU open to elk hunting, except GMU's not open to branch antlered bull elk hunting".  Instead, why not just list the couple of GMU's that are off-limits?  That would help the officers being called and asked the question instead of them having to look for 20 minutes to see if there are any branch bull hunting in the unit.

I would think he would have a decent chance at being found not guilty in court.  But I wouldn't bet on it either. :twocents:  And even if he is found not guilty sure doesn't mean he is innocent........just means the court found mitigating circumstances to let him get away with it.

(That's my 2 cents.  I'm nobody though, so my 2 cents is not worth much.  My opinion is only based on what I've read on the court of Hunt-Wa and Incident Report by WDFW).  And BTW - I'm in no way jealous.....not the least bit jealous in any way.  Just an interesting case to me so I'm following along.)

 Again Curly, they never asked the only relevant question surrounding this entire case, "is it legal to kill a branched antler bull in GMU334?"

 Any other question or discussion is pure window dressing! :twocents:

 Don't fall victim to their ploy of muddying the waters, nothing else in this entire case matters.

 The only question now is, will a judge/jury hold Reichert accountable for not knowing first hand if he could or could not kill a branched antler bull in that unit, claiming ignorance as his defense. "They told me they got permission from WDFW"

 Is that a viable excuse?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on June 29, 2016, 09:39:18 AM


I'd say TR is definitely not innocent.  He shot an elk in a closed unit.  That is an undisputed fact. 

Now, whether or not he ends up having to pay the price for the crime is another thing.  By calling wdfw and asking about firearm restrictions in the Ellensburg unit, they did cast a gray area on the case.  They may have found a scapegoat in the wdfw employee that answered their question about being ok to shoot an elk with a muzzleloader.

I guess the question that a judge or jury will likely have to think about is whether TR and his accomplices knew the rules and were just trying to find a way around them by calling wdfw and hoping to get someone that didn't know the specific rules for that permit. 

They might also have to think about how the rules are worded.  I do think it would leave less room for confusion when the rules didn't say "Any 300 or 500 series GMU open to elk hunting, except GMU's not open to branch antlered bull elk hunting".  Instead, why not just list the couple of GMU's that are off-limits?  That would help the officers being called and asked the question instead of them having to look for 20 minutes to see if there are any branch bull hunting in the unit.

I would think he would have a decent chance at being found not guilty in court.  But I wouldn't bet on it either. :twocents:  And even if he is found not guilty sure doesn't mean he is innocent........just means the court found mitigating circumstances to let him get away with it.

(That's my 2 cents.  I'm nobody though, so my 2 cents is not worth much.  My opinion is only based on what I've read on the court of Hunt-Wa and Incident Report by WDFW).  And BTW - I'm in no way jealous.....not the least bit jealous in any way.  Just an interesting case to me so I'm following along.)

 Again Curly, they never asked the only relevant question surrounding this entire case, "is it legal to kill a branched antler bull in GMU334?"

 Any other question or discussion is pure window dressing! :twocents:

Yeah, I know. It does seem like they were purposely trying to get away with it, but I know that sometimes juries will feel sorry for an old disabled guy so he could skate.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JimmyHoffa on June 29, 2016, 09:39:44 AM
Or for that matter what if someone's arrow only weights 420 grams instead of the the legal 430 grams
My guess is most if caught with an arrow 10 grams under weight would argue that it was a simple mistake but take the ticket and move on if the officer wrote them up.  They might take it to court and try to get it reduced but in the end technically they broke the rules.

Hunting the old muzzleloader 911 years ago someone pushed a herd of elk out of the ML911 area across the road we were driving out on.  The elk stopped on the left side of the road and we didn't shoot.  The elk were out of the area by 60 feet.  Could we have shot and said we shot on the correct side of the road and it died on the opposite side?  Yes, but if we were going to do that why wouldn't we just shoot one way out of bounds and out of everyone's view?  Same thing, out of bounds is out of bounds.

Would it be ethical if you shot an elk in a legal area but it was injured and ran into a non leagal area to finish it off.
What we teach in hunter education is to call enforcement and let them know what has happened before entering the closed area.  Way easier to explain what happened and much more believable when you call versus having someone else report seeing you in a closed area and then trying to explain to enforcement what happened.  Same applies if you shoot it on private/public land that you have access to and it dies on private land that you don't have access to.  Call enforcement.

Call enforcement and ask them if it's legal
after this case, I'd guess they would forward you on to some legal beagle in Olympia to handle all the phoned in questions.  I can't imagine why.....
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: WAPatriot on June 29, 2016, 09:42:27 AM
Has anyone heard a recording of the phone call? I know I haven't so I can say for sure that the state granted him permission to shoot the bull but as a hunter and Christian I give him the benefit of the doubt.

He's not the first and won't be the last guy the state try's to screw.

I hope the state has to pay him money lots of money.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on June 29, 2016, 09:47:45 AM
Has anyone heard a recording of the phone call? I know I haven't so I can say for sure that the state granted him permission to shoot the bull but as a hunter and Christian I give him the benefit of the doubt.

He's not the first and won't be the last guy the state try's to screw.

I hope the state has to pay him money lots of money.
How would the state be trying to screw him when he is the one that broke the law and shot the tame bull?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on June 29, 2016, 09:49:40 AM
 Actually there is another question regarding this case. Are *censored* in any way culpable in the case? :dunno:


(names removed due to request)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on June 29, 2016, 09:52:21 AM
It's too bad the state doesn't require guides to be licensed in some way. The so called guide is at much or more at fault than Reichert.  Hopefully Reichert will sue his guide for leading him down the wrong path.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: WAPatriot on June 29, 2016, 09:54:09 AM
By giving someone permission and then when a bunch of liberals get there panties in a wad charging him even though they gave him Permission.   And shooting a tame bull isn't a crime.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on June 29, 2016, 09:56:00 AM
Hopefully Reichert will sue his guide for leading him down the wrong path.

 Can he do that?

 Wouldn't Reichert say they told me it was okay, and then they simply deny it? :dunno:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on June 29, 2016, 09:56:54 AM
By giving someone permission and then when a bunch of liberals get there panties in a wad charging him even though they gave him Permission.   And shooting a tame bull isn't a crime.
Liberals. :chuckle:

Yeah, being tame isn't the legal issue here. If the tame bull was in 328 there would be no problem legally.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: NOCK NOCK on June 29, 2016, 09:57:39 AM


 Again Curly, they never asked the only relevant question surrounding this entire case, "is it legal to kill a branched antler bull in GMU334?"

 Any other question or discussion is pure window dressing! :twocents:

 Don't fall victim to their ploy of muddying the waters, nothing else in this entire case matters.

 The only question now is, will a judge/jury hold Reichert accountable for not knowing first hand if he could or could not kill a branched antler bull in that unit, claiming ignorance as his defense. "They told me they got permission from WDFW"

Is that a viable excuse?

 :yeah:

My question is......So if TR gets off/found "innocent", Does he get to keep the antlers?
It is an undeniable fact that the bull was shot in a closed unit. IMO, he should not be allowed to keep it. Allowing him to keep it does not seem fair no matter what the reasoning is to find him "innocent", and will only help to promote similar wrongdoings in the future.
Anyone who has watched the reality warden shows has seen that some times the animal/antlers are confiscated but the hunter is let go without a $$ fine/summons.



Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bob33 on June 29, 2016, 10:00:40 AM
Has anyone heard a recording of the phone call? I know I haven't so I can say for sure that the state granted him permission to shoot the bull but as a hunter and Christian I give him the benefit of the doubt.

He's not the first and won't be the last guy the state try's to screw.

I hope the state has to pay him money lots of money.
Glad to see your Christian view of giving someone the benefit of the doubt extends to everyone, including state employees. :tup:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on June 29, 2016, 10:05:40 AM
Actually there is another question regarding this case. Are Dave, Brian and Cody in any way culpable in the case? :dunno:
Great question and if not by the WDFW I would bet TR might have an issue with them in maybe a civil case.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bob33 on June 29, 2016, 10:09:07 AM
Actually there is another question regarding this case. Are Dave, Brian and Cody in any way culpable in the case? :dunno:
Great question and if not by the WDFW I would bet TR might have an issue with them in maybe a civil case.
If a friend told someone it was OK to speed, or to rob a bank, or to take an illegal drug, and he did and was caught, how is the friend legally culpable?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Magnum_Willys on June 29, 2016, 10:09:25 AM
Not defending anyone just thinking defense angle:

"We were after this specific trophy that we had been scouting but when we got up to the area it turns out the animal had moved across the canal and I was afraid he was outside the area we had researched and knew to be legal.   Not expecting to hunt in any nearby areas we didn't bring a copy of the game regs with us so we called the game department to get the quickest answer on whether it was legal with our tag to shoot where he had gone.  The Game Dept. guy had to look it up and called back in 15 minutes and said it was legal.  We then went and harvested this legal elk."   How penalized should we be for the States mistake ?

This could be the story...... or the defense...... ?  How will the Judge or Jury choose?

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on June 29, 2016, 10:12:46 AM
If the friend was getting paid tens of thousands of dollars and he claimed to have gotten permission but really didn't then I would hope that friend would have to at least give the money back.  But legally, that may not be the case.......although you can try to sue someone for anything these days, right?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: NOCK NOCK on June 29, 2016, 10:13:38 AM
Not defending anyone just thinking defense angle:

"We were after this specific trophy that we had been scouting but when we got up to the area it turns out the animal had moved across the canal and I was afraid he was outside the area we had researched and knew to be legal.   Not expecting to hunt in any nearby areas we didn't bring a copy of the game regs with us so we called the game department to get the quickest answer on whether it was legal with our tag to shoot where he had gone.  The Game Dept. guy had to look it up and called back in 15 minutes and said it was legal.  We then went and harvested this legal elk."   How penalized should we be for the States mistake ?

This could be the story...... or the defense...... ?  How will the Judge or Jury choose?

Pretty sure it was shot the day after the phone call. That defense will not fly.

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bob33 on June 29, 2016, 10:16:51 AM
If the friend was getting paid tens of thousands of dollars and he claimed to have gotten permission but really didn't then I would hope that friend would have to at least give the money back.  But legally, that may not be the case.......although you can try to sue someone for anything these days, right?
If I could sue anyone who ever gave me bad advice and win, I'd be rich.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on June 29, 2016, 10:20:35 AM
Not defending anyone just thinking defense angle:

"We were after this specific trophy that we had been scouting but when we got up to the area it turns out the animal had moved across the canal and I was afraid he was outside the area we had researched and knew to be legal.   Not expecting to hunt in any nearby areas we didn't bring a copy of the game regs with us so we called the game department to get the quickest answer on whether it was legal with our tag to shoot where he had gone.  The Game Dept. guy had to look it up and called back in 15 minutes and said it was legal.  We then went and harvested this legal elk."   How penalized should we be for the States mistake ?

This could be the story...... or the defense...... ?  How will the Judge or Jury choose?

 Thats a nice story, but not close to the report, which I'm sure will be posted by someone at some point.

 Scroll back to #1461, that's basically what it's going to come down to. ;)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Alchase on June 29, 2016, 10:39:08 AM
How many people on this thread harvested an elk last year. I'm thinking most of you guys are just internet jockey s who like hunters to get black eyes in media. My question is for JD and tennawayslayer and davemonti when's the last time you guys shot an elk?

I had a neighbor that got a bull every year as well, right up to when he got busted for poaching out of season bulls.

I Would never hunt with him either.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on June 29, 2016, 10:39:34 AM
If the friend was getting paid tens of thousands of dollars and he claimed to have gotten permission but really didn't then I would hope that friend would have to at least give the money back.  But legally, that may not be the case.......although you can try to sue someone for anything these days, right?
If I could sue anyone who ever gave me bad advice and win, I'd be rich.

Yeah, but the guy was acting as a hunting guide.  I know the hunter is ultimately responsible for knowing the laws, but hunting guides are supposed to know the laws too.  I just think he might get sympathy saying he was relying on his hunting guide and the info the guide relayed to him regarding the phone calls with wdfw.  I'm not sure if the fact that there is no licensing requirements for hunting guides in this state matters at all though. :dunno:  Because without a hunting guide licensing requirement, then is it just like a friend giving advice?

Personally, I have little sympathy.  TR should have been the one to call if he was unsure of the law.  I'm not sure why the questions about firearm restrictions anyway.  If they thought it was legal to kill the bull in that unit but were just unsure about using a modern rifle, why not just use the ML without even asking?  It's not like it was a hard stalk on the bull to get in range............
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on June 29, 2016, 10:41:33 AM
Not defending anyone just thinking defense angle:

"We were after this specific trophy that we had been scouting but when we got up to the area it turns out the animal had moved across the canal and I was afraid he was outside the area we had researched and knew to be legal.   Not expecting to hunt in any nearby areas we didn't bring a copy of the game regs with us so we called the game department to get the quickest answer on whether it was legal with our tag to shoot where he had gone.  The Game Dept. guy had to look it up and called back in 15 minutes and said it was legal.  We then went and harvested this legal elk."   How penalized should we be for the States mistake ?

This could be the story...... or the defense...... ?  How will the Judge or Jury choose?

 Thats a nice story, but not close to the report, which I'm sure will be posted by someone at some point.

 Scroll back to #1461, that's basically what it's going to come down to. ;)
The report however is not the holy grail.  I am sure there is a side to the story that hasn't been seen just yet.  The scenario above could be his defense and he could have something that backs it up.  I would have thought it would be in the report but still the report is just one view of the events. My guess is during negotiations more information will be presented on the defense side of things.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on June 29, 2016, 11:06:51 AM
Not defending anyone just thinking defense angle:

"We were after this specific trophy that we had been scouting but when we got up to the area it turns out the animal had moved across the canal and I was afraid he was outside the area we had researched and knew to be legal.   Not expecting to hunt in any nearby areas we didn't bring a copy of the game regs with us so we called the game department to get the quickest answer on whether it was legal with our tag to shoot where he had gone.  The Game Dept. guy had to look it up and called back in 15 minutes and said it was legal.  We then went and harvested this legal elk."   How penalized should we be for the States mistake ?

This could be the story...... or the defense...... ?  How will the Judge or Jury choose?

 Thats a nice story, but not close to the report, which I'm sure will be posted by someone at some point.

 Scroll back to #1461, that's basically what it's going to come down to. ;)
The report however is not the holy grail.  I am sure there is a side to the story that hasn't been seen just yet.  The scenario above could be his defense and he could have something that backs it up.  I would have thought it would be in the report but still the report is just one view of the events. My guess is during negotiations more information will be presented on the defense side of things.

 True, however after following this and a couple other threads on the subject, I'm confident that had there been a critical piece of evidence that exonerated Richert, Kiti, 257 or one of the other Reichert apologists surely would have played that card. :twocents:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on June 29, 2016, 11:11:27 AM
Not defending anyone just thinking defense angle:

"We were after this specific trophy that we had been scouting but when we got up to the area it turns out the animal had moved across the canal and I was afraid he was outside the area we had researched and knew to be legal.   Not expecting to hunt in any nearby areas we didn't bring a copy of the game regs with us so we called the game department to get the quickest answer on whether it was legal with our tag to shoot where he had gone.  The Game Dept. guy had to look it up and called back in 15 minutes and said it was legal.  We then went and harvested this legal elk."   How penalized should we be for the States mistake ?

This could be the story...... or the defense...... ?  How will the Judge or Jury choose?

 Thats a nice story, but not close to the report, which I'm sure will be posted by someone at some point.

 Scroll back to #1461, that's basically what it's going to come down to. ;)
The report however is not the holy grail.  I am sure there is a side to the story that hasn't been seen just yet.  The scenario above could be his defense and he could have something that backs it up.  I would have thought it would be in the report but still the report is just one view of the events. My guess is during negotiations more information will be presented on the defense side of things.

 True, however after following this and a couple other threads on the subject, I'm confident that had there been a critical piece of evidence that exonerated Richert, Kiti, 257 or one of the other Reichert apologists surely would have played that card. :twocents:
You would think.  That being said this thing has taken so many twists and turns that I never saw coming I have a hard time ruling anything out at this point.

My opinion on this one has changed slightly through this whole thing, slightly one way and then back the other.

Good news is that this thing should be done within a month or two and then the debates can really get going.

There is still one more side of the story to be told and somewhere between the two stories, the report and the defense, I believe is where the truth lies.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: DaveMonti on June 29, 2016, 12:21:50 PM
How many people on this thread harvested an elk last year. I'm thinking most of you guys are just internet jockey s who like hunters to get black eyes in media. My question is for JD and tennawayslayer and davemonti when's the last time you guys shot an elk?

Wow, this thread really took off again.  I even got called out by WA Patriot.  I'm not sure why I got called out though. 

WAPat, I've not made any judgement on any of these threads about TR, the whole incident, the "ethics" behind the incident, absolutely nothing condemning or excusing TR or anyone involved.  All I've done is comment about the absurdity of both sides on this topic, with participants debating the same points OVER and OVER and OVER, and no side of the argument making one bit of difference to the judicial process that I hope will actually be engaged.  Absurdity in the declaration of "truth" from both sides about the matter, when no "truth" can actually be proven beyond hearsay on this forum.  Yes, I'm guilty of calling the response to this topic Absurd. 

Now, I did make comments about the Bigfoot thread, so maybe you're knickers are in a knot because of what I have to say about that, but to call me out as though I'm directly opposed to your view on this matter, and as though harvesting or not harvesting an elk on my part is somehow relevant to your perceived argument against me?  I suggest you go back and read my comments.  I doubt you'll find anything on one "side" or the other.  Except, of course, the Bigfoot thread, and if you're mad about that, I hope you find peace some day. 

Perhaps you just mistook me for someone who actually cares enough about this to argue with you about it.  Certainly it was not me. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: CAMPMEAT on June 29, 2016, 12:40:06 PM
...........................at this point, who cares !!!!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on June 29, 2016, 03:44:49 PM
 :yeah: :yeah: :yeah: it's a pet folks. Now let's take the drive and determination this thread brought out and apply it to something meaningful, such as the idaho incident or something else of meaning. :dunno:  just sayin' :dunno:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on June 29, 2016, 04:31:39 PM
...........................at this point, who cares !!!!





Hey......    I care.

(said in my Luke Skywalker accent)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on June 29, 2016, 04:36:19 PM
And Davemonti, you are clearly only here to cause trouble.
All you want to do is pick a fight.    That is obvious.
 >:(
How else would you possibly defend criticizing the Big Foot thread?!?!?!?!?

All this nonsense over a dead pet is one thing, but attacking the Big Foot thread.......better interweb posters than you have lost that gambit.

 >:(
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: TVHunts on June 29, 2016, 05:53:55 PM
Here Kiti Kiti,
Here Kiti Kiti Kiti, where are you???
Seems that HW has lost our Kiti.  :dunno:
Maybe his 257 backfired and went boom
 :dunno: :chuckle: 8)

I would like to throw some money in the "Kiti" and wager that this will all be very "clear" real soon!  :tup:

 You internet "elk less" jockeys need to hold on to your city slicker panties and let justice prevail! What is wrong with you anyway?  Why, you couldn't shoot a tame elk in a farmers field and move it to another legal unit if your life depended on it! 

You Losers :hunt2:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: CAMPMEAT on June 29, 2016, 05:55:52 PM
...........................at this point, who cares !!!!





Hey......    I care.

(said in my Luke Skywalker accent)




60 pages and the guy is still guilty.......yawn! And, nothing has happened to him because of HW members.... :dunno:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: HntnFsh on June 29, 2016, 08:43:57 PM
How many people on this thread harvested an elk last year. I'm thinking most of you guys are just internet jockey s who like hunters to get black eyes in media. My question is for JD and tennawayslayer and davemonti when's the last time you guys shot an elk?
two years ago with my peaches tag. I have had a cow tag for the past three seasons and have chose to help other people on there hunts instead of harvesting an elk myself. I have a buddy who has one of the most desired rut tags in the state in the state this year. So I will eat another cow tag  :chuckle: Not that I owe you an explanation. But there it is.

So you only actually hunt elk when you draw bull/quality tag. Explains why you are so jealous of TR. also I think TR s lawyer needs to look into see if any of the landowners in 334 have bull nuisance tags. I know one guy who gets 5 bull tags a year.
 

I would be very surprised if he gets 5 bull tags a year. I know stranger things have happened. But Ive only ever seen depredation permits given out for cows.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: NOCK NOCK on June 29, 2016, 09:09:11 PM
Here Kiti Kiti,
Here Kiti Kiti Kiti, where are you???
Seems that HW has lost our Kiti.  :dunno:
Maybe his 257 backfired and went boom
 :dunno: :chuckle: 8)

I would like to throw some money in the "Kiti" and wager that this will all be very "clear" real soon!  :tup:

 You internet "elk less" jockeys need to hold on to your city slicker panties and let justice prevail! What is wrong with you anyway?  Why, you couldn't shoot a tame elk in a farmers field and move it to another legal unit if your life depended on it! 

You Losers :hunt2:


LOL   :rolleyes:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: popeshawnpaul on June 29, 2016, 10:17:39 PM
Not defending anyone just thinking defense angle:

"We were after this specific trophy that we had been scouting but when we got up to the area it turns out the animal had moved across the canal and I was afraid he was outside the area we had researched and knew to be legal.   Not expecting to hunt in any nearby areas we didn't bring a copy of the game regs with us so we called the game department to get the quickest answer on whether it was legal with our tag to shoot where he had gone.  The Game Dept. guy had to look it up and called back in 15 minutes and said it was legal.  We then went and harvested this legal elk."   How penalized should we be for the States mistake ?

This could be the story...... or the defense...... ?  How will the Judge or Jury choose?

Pretty sure it was shot the day after the phone call. That defense will not fly.

It was good enough for a pre-trial dismissal offer and no jail time...  He does not admit fault, pays some $, and in a year he is hunting again with no title 77 conviction.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: DaveMonti on June 29, 2016, 10:46:25 PM
Dan-O, I hope you find peace one day as well.   >:( >:( >:(
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: DaveMonti on June 29, 2016, 10:48:57 PM
:yeah: :yeah: :yeah: it's a pet folks. Now let's take the drive and determination this thread brought out and apply it to something meaningful, such as the idaho incident or something else of meaning. :dunno:  just sayin' :dunno:

Plat,
Just what is the "Idaho incident"?  Where can I read about it?  I need something new and entertaining to read. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on June 29, 2016, 11:24:13 PM
It's been posted on here several times. Check the off - topics area.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on June 30, 2016, 12:09:14 AM
:yeah: :yeah: :yeah: it's a pet folks. Now let's take the drive and determination this thread brought out and apply it to something meaningful, such as the idaho incident or something else of meaning. :dunno:  just sayin' :dunno:

Plat,
Just what is the "Idaho incident"?  Where can I read about it?  I need something new and entertaining to read.

Wait.....    was Bullwinkle shot in Idaho?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: DaveMonti on June 30, 2016, 09:25:37 AM
It's been posted on here several times. Check the off - topics area.

Thanks Plat, I stay out of "Off Topics", but I do now know what incident you were referring to. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 2MANY on June 30, 2016, 09:34:39 AM
The legend of Bullwinkle may out live the legend of Jesus at this rate.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: mfswallace on June 30, 2016, 11:12:31 PM
 :dunno: :dunno:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: teanawayslayer on July 01, 2016, 03:53:50 AM
The legend of Bullwinkle may out live the legend of Jesus at this rate.
ok you lost me on that one. Makes no sense.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Ghost Hunter on July 01, 2016, 07:22:24 AM
The legend of Bullwinkle may out live the legend of Jesus at this rate.
ok you lost me on that one. Makes no sense.
Trying to get it back to off topics. :dunno: :bdid:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on July 01, 2016, 07:41:45 AM
Uh no.....


Bullwinkle will be a footnote in Jesus' story.

Just sayin'.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: TheHunt on July 01, 2016, 08:38:02 AM
:yeah: :yeah: :yeah: it's a pet folks. Now let's take the drive and determination this thread brought out and apply it to something meaningful, such as the idaho incident or something else of meaning. :dunno:  just sayin' :dunno:

I work too much...  So what happened in Idaho?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on July 01, 2016, 09:55:49 AM
:yeah: :yeah: :yeah: it's a pet folks. Now let's take the drive and determination this thread brought out and apply it to something meaningful, such as the idaho incident or something else of meaning. :dunno:  just sayin' :dunno:

I work too much...  So what happened in Idaho?
It's in off topics, nothing to do with elk or hunting.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: mfswallace on July 01, 2016, 12:37:43 PM
What's the title of the thread :dunno: :bash:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on July 07, 2016, 03:59:24 PM
Any new news? :dunno:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Troutdreamer on July 07, 2016, 05:02:29 PM
In the paper...

"Hurson scheduled another pretrial conference for July 26, with a tentative trial date set for Aug. 19"
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: crowinghen on July 08, 2016, 08:56:49 AM
i just had to come check-- I read on another post that this one was over.
Guess not!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JimmyHoffa on July 08, 2016, 09:15:19 AM
Any new news? :dunno:
Once his wire transfer to the Clinton Foundation shows, his charges should be dropped..... :sry:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: DaveMonti on July 08, 2016, 09:55:27 AM
The tread got quiet once Dan-O went on vacation. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Alchase on July 08, 2016, 10:27:32 AM
The tread got quiet once Dan-O went on vacation. 

Or it could be the lack of "new" information!

Naw, I agree, it is because Dan-o is MIA, LOL
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: popeshawnpaul on July 11, 2016, 06:34:08 PM
The defense attorney has filed a motion to lift the pre-trial release condition of "no hunting" and to dismiss the case.  Presumably they want to use the tag he has for this year.  Not sure of the reasoning of the motion to dismiss but it would be interesting to read.  It has not been set for a hearing or anything to decide the issue but it seems the prosecutor must have input on this and be given time to respond.  Possibly it's addressed at the next hearing or a motions date gets set.

Ok, commence the BS posts Dan-O and gang for a while...   :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: teanawayslayer on July 11, 2016, 06:38:20 PM
The defense attorney has filed a motion to lift the pre-trial release condition of "no hunting" and to dismiss the case.  Presumably they want to use the tag he has for this year.  Not sure of the reasoning of the motion to dismiss but it would be interesting to read.  It has not been set for a hearing or anything to decide the issue but it seems the prosecutor must have input on this and be given time to respond.  Possibly it's addressed at the next hearing or a motions date gets set.

Ok, commence the BS posts Dan-O and gang for a while...   :chuckle:
i thought the judge already turned there request down?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on July 11, 2016, 06:45:13 PM
I'm baaaaa-aaaaaaack!       :hello:

It feels good to be missed.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on July 11, 2016, 06:48:38 PM
I'm baaaaa-aaaaaaack!       :hello:

It feels good to be missed.

YOU WERE GONE? :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on July 11, 2016, 06:56:35 PM
I'm baaaaa-aaaaaaack!       :hello:

It feels good to be missed.

YOU WERE GONE? :chuckle:

Dude, why do you think the thread faded?   

That's right........   I AM this thread!

It is ALL ABOUT ME...............oh yeah, and a pet elk died, too.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on July 11, 2016, 06:58:10 PM
I'm baaaaa-aaaaaaack!       :hello:

It feels good to be missed.

YOU WERE GONE? :chuckle:

Dude, why do you think the thread faded?   

That's right........   I AM this thread!

It is ALL ABOUT ME...............oh yeah, and a pet elk died, too.

HOW DO YOU KNOW IT WAS A PET ELK, DID YOU EVER SEE ANYONE PET IT?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on July 11, 2016, 07:08:45 PM
I'm baaaaa-aaaaaaack!       :hello:

It feels good to be missed.

YOU WERE GONE? :chuckle:

Dude, why do you think the thread faded?   

That's right........   I AM this thread!

It is ALL ABOUT ME...............oh yeah, and a pet elk died, too.

HOW DO YOU KNOW IT WAS A PET ELK, DID YOU EVER SEE ANYONE PET IT?

I know it was a pet elk because I read it on the internet......   and if this thread has taught us anything, it has taught us that if you read it on the internet it must be true.

Duh...............
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on July 11, 2016, 07:10:16 PM
THIS IS NOT THE FRENCH INTERNET. :tdown:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on July 11, 2016, 07:11:25 PM
oh, wee wee, misseur.

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on July 11, 2016, 07:14:20 PM
Also, did I mention that this bull was shot in a closed unit - maybe?

But not to worry.....  There's more to the story.... much more.

I just can't tell it all here, because I don't want to.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: DaveMonti on July 11, 2016, 08:51:35 PM
A unit that was closed to what?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on July 11, 2016, 08:52:24 PM
A unit that was closed to what?

BULLWINKLE  ;)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: DaveMonti on July 11, 2016, 08:54:43 PM
I didn't think there were any moose in that unit.  Is Rocky OK?  I hope he's OK.  What a tragedy it would be to lose both of them. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on July 11, 2016, 09:13:42 PM
Rocky is an invasive species to that GMU.

I have it on good authority that a call was made to WD-40 to verify that they could shoot him if he wasn't up a sleeve.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bob33 on July 11, 2016, 09:14:52 PM
Rocky sux.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on July 11, 2016, 09:22:48 PM
Is Rocky OK?

 Nope, he's a Western Grey Squirrel. :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on July 11, 2016, 09:25:35 PM
Finally.......

More good, free flowing information on this issue......

Finally......
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: DaveMonti on July 11, 2016, 09:35:38 PM
Ahem, Wikipedia says Rocky is a FLYING squirrel, which is NOT an invasive species according to all kinds of fancy Flying Squirrel Range Maps.  Please stop spreading misinformation, it really makes one look bad.  This thread is better than a pile of false information.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on July 11, 2016, 09:42:22 PM
Ahem, Wikipedia says Rocky is a FLYING squirrel, which is NOT an invasive species according to all kinds of fancy Flying Squirrel Range Maps.  Please stop spreading misinformation, it really makes one look bad.  This thread is better than a pile of false information.

Well, if you have a raffle tag for West Side Flying Squirrel, or a Governor's tag for an antlerless squirrel, I hear you can call Wolf Haven and get permission to shoot a pet elk.

Do you know if he also got the Northwest Trek elk permit?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on July 11, 2016, 09:43:07 PM
 >:(
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on July 11, 2016, 09:47:47 PM
>:(

Wrong thread......   This one doesn't have nearly the seriosity.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on July 11, 2016, 09:52:28 PM
Ahem, Wikipedia says Rocky is a FLYING squirrel, which is NOT an invasive species according to all kinds of fancy Flying Squirrel Range Maps.  Please stop spreading misinformation, it really makes one look bad.  This thread is better than a pile of false information.

 He may not be invasive but you still can't harm him.
Quote
Western gray, Douglas', red, and flying squirrels are all protected species in Washington (WAC 232-12-011)
:chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on July 11, 2016, 09:56:30 PM
Ahem, Wikipedia says Rocky is a FLYING squirrel, which is NOT an invasive species according to all kinds of fancy Flying Squirrel Range Maps.  Please stop spreading misinformation, it really makes one look bad.  This thread is better than a pile of false information.

 He may not be invasive but you still can't harm him.
Quote
Western gray, Douglas', red, and flying squirrels are all protected species in Washington (WAC 232-12-011)
:chuckle:

No problem..... I know who too call....

(Sorry, too easy.)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: DaveMonti on July 11, 2016, 10:24:51 PM
Ahem, Wikipedia says Rocky is a FLYING squirrel, which is NOT an invasive species according to all kinds of fancy Flying Squirrel Range Maps.  Please stop spreading misinformation, it really makes one look bad.  This thread is better than a pile of false information.

 He may not be invasive but you still can't harm him.
Quote
Western gray, Douglas', red, and flying squirrels are all protected species in Washington (WAC 232-12-011)
:chuckle:

I don't want him harmed.  I'm glad the unit is close to Rocky and his relatives.  The good people that make their home in that unit can't deal with another loss.  Being that it's a closed unit, it assures Rocky's surviva....wait a minute.... :o
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on July 11, 2016, 10:55:10 PM
Both legal animals for me to hun....ummmm....nevermind :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Alchase on July 13, 2016, 12:16:47 PM
Both legal animals for me to hun....ummmm....nevermind :chuckle:

So are Sealions, I bet you would have a couple thousand helpers urging you on.  :tup:

LOL
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: popeshawnpaul on July 15, 2016, 11:35:56 AM
Pre-trial was reset to July 28.  Not sure when they are going to argue the motion to dismiss and to modify conditions.  Jury trial date is still set in August so before then presumably.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on July 17, 2016, 10:12:24 PM
It's been quite a while.

Is that elk still dead?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Alchase on July 18, 2016, 09:59:32 AM
It's been quite a while.

Is that elk still dead?

Word is, it got up and moved itself to an open GMU!
Imagine that!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: DaveMonti on July 18, 2016, 10:01:36 AM
I wonder where the meat is.  Did the WDFW confiscate it?  One could put on a hell of a supper with all the meat from that bull. 
Anyone have any favorite recipes for elk?

That's right, I used the word "supper".  Old school.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: headshot5 on July 18, 2016, 11:02:58 AM
Quote
I wonder where the meat is.  Did the WDFW confiscate it?  One could put on a hell of a supper with all the meat from that bull. 
Anyone have any favorite recipes for elk?

That's right, I used the word "supper".  Old school.


Like my eggs...  Poached.   :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: DaveMonti on July 18, 2016, 11:07:19 AM
Quote
I wonder where the meat is.  Did the WDFW confiscate it?  One could put on a hell of a supper with all the meat from that bull. 
Anyone have any favorite recipes for elk?

That's right, I used the word "supper".  Old school.


Like my eggs...  Poached.   :chuckle:

VERY nice!   :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on July 18, 2016, 11:20:37 AM
Did wdfw bury him at Pet Semetary?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on July 18, 2016, 12:24:04 PM
He's dead.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jkthomps on July 18, 2016, 02:06:38 PM
Quote
I wonder where the meat is.  Did the WDFW confiscate it?  One could put on a hell of a supper with all the meat from that bull. 
Anyone have any favorite recipes for elk?

That's right, I used the word "supper".  Old school.


Like my eggs...  Poached.   :chuckle:

hahaha nice!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: headshot5 on July 18, 2016, 02:12:16 PM
Quote
I wonder where the meat is.  Did the WDFW confiscate it?  One could put on a hell of a supper with all the meat from that bull. 
Anyone have any favorite recipes for elk?

That's right, I used the word "supper".  Old school.


Like my eggs...  Poached.   :chuckle:


hahaha nice!



The other option was...  like my eggs over easy.   I shoot 'em in the field so it's over, and in a closed unit so it's easy.   :P
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on July 18, 2016, 02:13:39 PM
 :lol4:

Poached and over-easy. :chuckle:  Funny stuff!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on July 18, 2016, 02:34:22 PM
He's dead.

Still????


Sheesh....
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: DaveMonti on July 18, 2016, 09:27:49 PM
I like my elk to take out.  Take out of a closed unit, deliver to an open unit. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on July 18, 2016, 09:39:23 PM
The "True Spike" regulations are so confusing.....
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JimmyHoffa on July 18, 2016, 09:54:43 PM
Quote
I wonder where the meat is.  Did the WDFW confiscate it?  One could put on a hell of a supper with all the meat from that bull. 
Anyone have any favorite recipes for elk?

That's right, I used the word "supper".  Old school.


Like my eggs...  Poached.   :chuckle:
:o
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on July 24, 2016, 12:32:47 AM
Pre-trial was reset to July 28.  Not sure when they are going to argue the motion to dismiss and to modify conditions.  Jury trial date is still set in August so before then presumably.

 Modify conditions? As in allow him to hunt until it's settled?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: popeshawnpaul on July 28, 2016, 10:31:14 AM
Pre-trial was reset to July 28.  Not sure when they are going to argue the motion to dismiss and to modify conditions.  Jury trial date is still set in August so before then presumably.

 Modify conditions? As in allow him to hunt until it's settled?

Yes, they had the motion to ask the judge to recuse himself as his comments at a prior hearing indicated to the defense attorney that the 10 day rule was not applicable on this case.  Normally, you have within 10 days of arraignment to file an "Affidavit of Prejudice" and ask the judge to recuse himself.  After that, they don't need to and it becomes rather discretionary.

The judge denied the defense motion to recuse himself or not remove himself under the change of judge rule.

The second part of the motion was to modify conditions of release.  At the previous hearing when they set conditions of release, one of the conditions was that the defendant not hunt while the case is pending.  That would obviously make it impossible for him to use his auction tag this year unless there was resolution of the matter before the end of the season and the conditions of the resolution allowed hunting.  The judge ruled in favor of the defense and modified conditions of release so that he may hunt while this case is pending.  There is a new scheduling conference set for August 9 but I would bet the trial gets set out a ways so that some hunting can occur in Sept. before any conviction or deal is struck where the defendant can't use the tag...
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on July 28, 2016, 10:42:09 AM
Server crash in 5,4,3,2,1.....
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Alchase on July 28, 2016, 10:43:37 AM
Well that sucks, not really surprised though.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Troutdreamer on July 28, 2016, 11:24:39 AM
http://www.dailyrecordnews.com/members/dismissal-requested-in-bullwinkle-case/article_9d0d52c4-541b-11e6-96d8-0b8324281ae2.html
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: teanawayslayer on July 28, 2016, 12:16:44 PM
That's a good defense. The regulations are unclear. Those Bulls would have been harvested long ago if the regs were "unclear". :bash:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on July 28, 2016, 12:24:05 PM
That's a good defense. The regulations are unclear. Those Bulls would have been harvested long ago if the regs were "unclear". :bash:

Playing for time.  Hormel is going to file motion after motion in order to buy time to hunt the tags Reichert has purchased. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on July 28, 2016, 01:34:38 PM
Wait......   

Was this a bull?

Where was it killed?

Why hasn't this been posted sooner?

I am outraged.

Who is with me?????



Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on July 28, 2016, 02:18:28 PM
I thought it was a trophy class cow elk named buttons???? :dunno:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bob33 on July 28, 2016, 02:31:15 PM
Wait......   

Was this a bull?

Where was it killed?

Why hasn't this been posted sooner?

I am outraged.

Who is with me?????
Dan, you're not going to be pleased to know who Tod is using to represent him. Sorry.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on July 28, 2016, 02:47:04 PM
 :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on July 28, 2016, 02:54:54 PM
 :dunno:
Who doesn't like Kam?
Does Dan-0 have some sort of a problem with Kam?
 :dunno:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on July 28, 2016, 03:58:44 PM
Kam sucks!!!!!!!!!

More importantly:

Elk Lives Matter!!!!!

I say we march on Kittitas and shut it down until our voices are heard!!!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: mfswallace on July 28, 2016, 04:02:53 PM
Wait......   

Was this a bull?

Where was it killed?

Why hasn't this been posted sooner?

I am outraged.

Who is with me?????

Not me, I don't find poaching that funny no matter how long the thread in the subject :twocents:
U have already made it clear u don't care with numerous other posts like this...
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on July 28, 2016, 04:11:07 PM
Wait......   

Was this a bull?

Where was it killed?

Why hasn't this been posted sooner?

I am outraged.

Who is with me?????

Not me, I don't find poaching that funny no matter how long the thread in the subject :twocents:
U have already made it clear u don't care with numerous other posts like this...

:yeah:

And people wonder why game law violations are not taken seriously.  Go figure. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Antlershed on July 28, 2016, 05:06:27 PM
http://www.dailyrecordnews.com/members/dismissal-requested-in-bullwinkle-case/article_9d0d52c4-541b-11e6-96d8-0b8324281ae2.html
Hmm, what happened to the "we had special permission from WDFW" defense...?  :dunno:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: teanawayslayer on July 28, 2016, 05:47:08 PM
Did cam have a neck injury in the off season? He looks a little off in the picture. 😜
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on July 28, 2016, 06:07:47 PM
What happened to the other bull in the pics?  Or was it two of the other bulls?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: popeshawnpaul on July 28, 2016, 06:15:14 PM
Wait......   

Was this a bull?

Where was it killed?

Why hasn't this been posted sooner?

I am outraged.

Who is with me?????

Not me, I don't find poaching that funny no matter how long the thread in the subject :twocents:
U have already made it clear u don't care with numerous other posts like this...

:yeah:

And people wonder why game law violations are not taken seriously.  Go figure.

Do the people that post the same dumb posts over and over realize nobody thinks it's funny?  I also wonder their employment status is that they have this much time to just post on a website everyday with posts of no value that repeat the same dumb joke over and over?  Can mods delete that crap or have them post on a joke post that nobody goes to for information that has value?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Backstraps on July 28, 2016, 07:19:05 PM
 :yeah:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on July 28, 2016, 08:00:11 PM
It's serious, the difference between my opinion and others is reality of the situation.  I posted from the beginning I didn't nor do I condone the actions, but knew it would end up as a mere blip on the radar. Despite the facts it will still play out to very little and his final conviction and sentence will not please everyone. I worked for many years in l.e. and seen my fair share to know it's going to be light. I simply choose to not take this particular incident as serious as others.  Oh and I'm employed full time.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on July 28, 2016, 08:28:33 PM
Wait......   

Was this a bull?

Where was it killed?

Why hasn't this been posted sooner?

I am outraged.

Who is with me?????

Not me, I don't find poaching that funny no matter how long the thread in the subject :twocents:
U have already made it clear u don't care with numerous other posts like this...

:yeah:

And people wonder why game law violations are not taken seriously.  Go figure.

Do the people that post the same dumb posts over and over realize nobody thinks it's funny?  I also wonder their employment status is that they have this much time to just post on a website everyday with posts of no value that repeat the same dumb joke over and over?  Can mods delete that crap or have them post on a joke post that nobody goes to for information that has value?

I don't think that poaching is funny either.   Not even a little.

The difference between me and some fo you is that I also don't think that a lynch mob is very funny.

I'm kind of a fan of due process, and internet Kangaroo Courts ARE A JOKE, whether you jurors think so or not.

I don't know the guy from Adam.   I wasn't there.   Neither were you armchair lynchers.

If he's guilty, throw the book at him.

BUT, until that is determined in court, I think the guy deserves the same benefit of the doubt that I'd give you guys.

Now, please continue with your internet inquisition.......
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: mfswallace on July 28, 2016, 08:48:59 PM
Wait......   

Was this a bull?

Where was it killed?

Why hasn't this been posted sooner?

I am outraged.

Who is with me?????

Not me, I don't find poaching that funny no matter how long the thread in the subject :twocents:
U have already made it clear u don't care with numerous other posts like this...

:yeah:

And people wonder why game law violations are not taken seriously.  Go figure.

Do the people that post the same dumb posts over and over realize nobody thinks it's funny?  I also wonder their employment status is that they have this much time to just post on a website everyday with posts of no value that repeat the same dumb joke over and over?  Can mods delete that crap or have them post on a joke post that nobody goes to for information that has value?

I don't think that poaching is funny either.   Not even a little.

The difference between me and some fo you is that I also don't think that a lynch mob is very funny.

I'm kind of a fan of due process, and internet Kangaroo Courts ARE A JOKE, whether you jurors think so or not.

I don't know the guy from Adam.   I wasn't there.   Neither were you armchair lynchers.

If he's guilty, throw the book at him.

BUT, until that is determined in court, I think the guy deserves the same benefit of the doubt that I'd give you guys.

Now, please continue with your internet inquisition.......

While I might have thought the other 3-4 times you have made these comments were tiresome but at least when it was getting to be speculative this time there was no lynching as the thread was dead and then revived with actual "due process" stuff happening...
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on July 28, 2016, 09:14:00 PM
I will grant you that.

And in the spirit of a harmonious hunt wa, I will try to refrain from sidetracking this thread.

I will try....
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on July 28, 2016, 09:34:45 PM
P.S.    I truly do hope that this state starts taking poaching prosecution and sentencing more seriously.

If you're found guilty, the punishment should hurt.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: mfswallace on July 28, 2016, 09:38:16 PM
I will grant you that.

And in the spirit of a harmonious hunt wa, I will try to refrain from sidetracking this thread.

I will try....

That's all any of us can do ;)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jkthomps on July 29, 2016, 07:14:54 AM


Wait......   

Was this a bull?

Where was it killed?

Why hasn't this been posted sooner?

I am outraged.

Who is with me?????

Not me, I don't find poaching that funny no matter how long the thread in the subject :twocents:
U have already made it clear u don't care with numerous other posts like this...

:yeah:

And people wonder why game law violations are not taken seriously.  Go figure.

Do the people that post the same dumb posts over and over realize nobody thinks it's funny?  I also wonder their employment status is that they have this much time to just post on a website everyday with posts of no value that repeat the same dumb joke over and over?  Can mods delete that crap or have them post on a joke post that nobody goes to for information that has value?

Curious, what does employment status have to do with anyone's posts? You, being a lawyer and all, should know about technology and one's ability to post while on the go. Was that your attempt at trying to belittle someone?

You out of all people should know that you are going to have all sorts of opinions and banter on an open forum. The best part about the "I don't care" posts is it is keeping people engaged and aware of what is happening, whether you like the b.s. posts or not.

Be the bigger person if you have to be, and just look past the irrelevant comments, and be happy more people are actually following what is going on, even if some posts seem irrelevant.



Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: popeshawnpaul on July 29, 2016, 09:37:02 AM


Wait......   

Was this a bull?

Where was it killed?

Why hasn't this been posted sooner?

I am outraged.

Who is with me?????

Not me, I don't find poaching that funny no matter how long the thread in the subject :twocents:
U have already made it clear u don't care with numerous other posts like this...

:yeah:

And people wonder why game law violations are not taken seriously.  Go figure.

Do the people that post the same dumb posts over and over realize nobody thinks it's funny?  I also wonder their employment status is that they have this much time to just post on a website everyday with posts of no value that repeat the same dumb joke over and over?  Can mods delete that crap or have them post on a joke post that nobody goes to for information that has value?

Curious, what does employment status have to do with anyone's posts? You, being a lawyer and all, should know about technology and one's ability to post while on the go. Was that your attempt at trying to belittle someone?

You out of all people should know that you are going to have all sorts of opinions and banter on an open forum. The best part about the "I don't care" posts is it is keeping people engaged and aware of what is happening, whether you like the b.s. posts or not.

Be the bigger person if you have to be, and just look past the irrelevant comments, and be happy more people are actually following what is going on, even if some posts seem irrelevant.



Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

It's very obvious that the constant, all the time, frequent posts indicate one is going back to this thread over and over to ask, "wait, was an elk shot?" and then there is 2-3 pages of BS responding. Most people don't have the time to do that, hence, my jab indicating isn't there something more important or productive to do than mess a thread up?  When one comes back to this thread for information on what is going on or substantive opinions on the issue, you have to wade through pages of BS to find the info people want to find.  Now the response is they essentially don't like the thread because they think we should all be waiting for due process before discussing the merits of the case and the likely outcomes.  It gets frustrating, hence, the jab.  If you don't like the thread, it's easy to not look at it and not post. 

Some of us are interested in the legal process, motions, and nature of the prosecution and defense.  I get constant PM's from people that don't post but want insight on issues or what is happening.  That's why I try and post so that people can have the info.  Then I have to read another post asking, "what type of elk was it?" and it gets annoying.  Sooner or later you swat at the mosquito buzzing around your head.  Being an attorney doesn't give me special power to be patient and accept the gnats.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on July 29, 2016, 09:50:49 AM
Sounds fair enough to me.  :tup:

I really appreciate the insight that you have provided on this matter.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on July 29, 2016, 10:05:02 AM
It is my opinion that this sidetracking is deliberate and done in order to frustrate people who are interested in keeping current on what is happening with this case.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Alchase on July 29, 2016, 10:36:17 AM
Pope, my opinion of this whole legal process is very jaded because from the start, this "accused poacher" has been handled with kid gloves and seemingly treated very different then say the average hunter.

It just seems so wrong for a judge to "allow" a hunter who has broken hunting laws in the past, been charged, and in the middle of another hunting law violation trial be given the "privilege" to hunt while in the process of the proceedings!

In your experience, is this typical?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jkthomps on July 29, 2016, 11:04:30 AM


Wait......   

Was this a bull?

Where was it killed?

Why hasn't this been posted sooner?

I am outraged.

Who is with me?????

Not me, I don't find poaching that funny no matter how long the thread in the subject :twocents:
U have already made it clear u don't care with numerous other posts like this...

:yeah:

And people wonder why game law violations are not taken seriously.  Go figure.

Do the people that post the same dumb posts over and over realize nobody thinks it's funny?  I also wonder their employment status is that they have this much time to just post on a website everyday with posts of no value that repeat the same dumb joke over and over?  Can mods delete that crap or have them post on a joke post that nobody goes to for information that has value?

Curious, what does employment status have to do with anyone's posts? You, being a lawyer and all, should know about technology and one's ability to post while on the go. Was that your attempt at trying to belittle someone?

You out of all people should know that you are going to have all sorts of opinions and banter on an open forum. The best part about the "I don't care" posts is it is keeping people engaged and aware of what is happening, whether you like the b.s. posts or not.

Be the bigger person if you have to be, and just look past the irrelevant comments, and be happy more people are actually following what is going on, even if some posts seem irrelevant.



Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

It's very obvious that the constant, all the time, frequent posts indicate one is going back to this thread over and over to ask, "wait, was an elk shot?" and then there is 2-3 pages of BS responding. Most people don't have the time to do that, hence, my jab indicating isn't there something more important or productive to do than mess a thread up?  When one comes back to this thread for information on what is going on or substantive opinions on the issue, you have to wade through pages of BS to find the info people want to find.  Now the response is they essentially don't like the thread because they think we should all be waiting for due process before discussing the merits of the case and the likely outcomes.  It gets frustrating, hence, the jab.  If you don't like the thread, it's easy to not look at it and not post. 

Some of us are interested in the legal process, motions, and nature of the prosecution and defense.  I get constant PM's from people that don't post but want insight on issues or what is happening.  That's why I try and post so that people can have the info.  Then I have to read another post asking, "what type of elk was it?" and it gets annoying.  Sooner or later you swat at the mosquito buzzing around your head.  Being an attorney doesn't give me special power to be patient and accept the gnats.

Okay, so your comment about one’s employment was a jab at someone(s) specific, and it had nothing to do with the value of the thread. Except to try and get an already derailed thread back on topic. Got it. I guess I read that as being too generalized of a backhanded comment. It was before my coffee and I must have misunderstood this morning. Sorry about that. :hello:

With that, I understand where your frustration is coming from… I am watching and following this situation closely and one of the few who are interested in ”the legal process, motions, and nature of prosecution and defense.” I agree with your metaphor, but I am trying focus on the positive side of the bs posts; the fact that many people are paying attention to this case, even if they don’t have anything of value to contribute, they are interacting and know what is going on. Whether they will admit it or not, I bet those who are posting a ton of banter probably know the current details on this case, and it will be interesting to see the comments when the case is closed. All the “I told you so” or “our system is messed up” or “he got what he deserved.” We all know that no matter what the outcome is, someone will have a comment that will not add any value to this thread…

Kinda like my most recent comments haha.  :dunno:

Anyways, back to the topic at hand.

Have a good weekend!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: dscubame on July 29, 2016, 11:55:51 AM
Wow.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: popeshawnpaul on July 29, 2016, 04:58:30 PM
Pope, my opinion of this whole legal process is very jaded because from the start, this "accused poacher" has been handled with kid gloves and seemingly treated very different then say the average hunter.

It just seems so wrong for a judge to "allow" a hunter who has broken hunting laws in the past, been charged, and in the middle of another hunting law violation trial be given the "privilege" to hunt while in the process of the proceedings!

In your experience, is this typical?

It's unusual to lift the "no hunting" condition.  It's typical to have on poaching cases.  I had an arraignment on another poaching case and the judge ordered "no hunting or fishing".  I was upset at the fishing condition as it had nothing to do with the hunting type violation.  In fact, the hunting violation didn't even include hunting but was a charge under RCW title 77 which is the hunting statute.  Had my client cared, I would have filed a motion to lift these conditions.

The judge in this case was just filed on as being biased and asked to recuse himself on this matter.  Perhaps the lifting of the hunting condition was a consulation as he knew the defense was already trying to pressure him to remove himself from the case as biased.  We will never know and that is speculative.  I think this opens up a lot of options for the defendant in this case.  He can now push the trial out until that expensive tag is filled and then take the good deal, knowing he won't hunt for a year, starting in maybe October or November of 2016.  The deal will essentially continue the prosecution and in a year will be dismissed.  There will be no jail and he can hunt the latter part of the 2017 season and not miss a hunting season.  No conviction or loss of hunting this or next season.  This seems like a win win and a no-brainer legally.  I'd advise him to take this in October after he has filled his tag, have the charge dismissed next October, and hunt another expensive tag the end of next season.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on July 29, 2016, 05:35:03 PM
It's setting precedents for sure.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on July 29, 2016, 06:31:58 PM
That's what I would do.  push it back, call in a masher in September, take the deal in October, take a year off, buy the auction tag for 2017 and shoot another masher in the late season, December and never miss a beat.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jkthomps on July 30, 2016, 09:54:10 AM
That's what I would do.  push it back, call in a masher in September, take the deal in October, take a year off, buy the auction tag for 2017 and shoot another masher in the late season, December and never miss a beat.
I would hope that you would never be in this situation ;).

I think we know where this case is going...

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jkthomps on July 31, 2016, 01:59:00 PM
Hey, popeshawnpaul, do you cycle? Swear I saw you on the bike trail by Bothell today...

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on August 09, 2016, 10:32:52 AM
So today is the day we find out if he can push this out far enough to get some September bugle hunting in?  He has the Governor/Auction tag for Pennsylvania also so he might be a busy guy in September.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on August 09, 2016, 02:26:24 PM
HOPEFULLY HES SITTING AT HOME WAITING FOR HIS DAY IN COURT, OR IN A JAIL CELL IF HES CONVICTED OF DOING WHAT HES BEEN CHARGED WITH.  :twocents:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on August 09, 2016, 04:03:58 PM
Not that he doesn't deserve a punishment if/when a conviction is found I doubt he will be facing jail as he has no prior criminal history as it pertains to poaching. More likely than not, he will have fines, community service, restitution and lengthy probation but I doubt jail time. :dunno:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on August 09, 2016, 04:52:52 PM
Not that he doesn't deserve a punishment if/when a conviction is found I doubt he will be facing jail as he has no prior criminal history as it pertains to poaching. More likely than not, he will have fines, community service, restitution and lengthy probation but I doubt jail time. :dunno:

YEP YOU'RE RIGHT, JUST WISHFUL THINKING.  :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on August 09, 2016, 05:11:11 PM
Not that he doesn't deserve a punishment if/when a conviction is found I doubt he will be facing jail as he has no prior criminal history as it pertains to poaching. More likely than not, he will have fines, community service, restitution and lengthy probation but I doubt jail time. :dunno:

YEP YOU'RE RIGHT, JUST WISHFUL THINKING.  :chuckle:

Stop yelling at me... :'(  you're hurting my feelings... :'(







 :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on August 09, 2016, 05:17:09 PM
Not that he doesn't deserve a punishment if/when a conviction is found I doubt he will be facing jail as he has no prior criminal history as it pertains to poaching. More likely than not, he will have fines, community service, restitution and lengthy probation but I doubt jail time. :dunno:

YEP YOU'RE RIGHT, JUST WISHFUL THINKING.  :chuckle:

Stop yelling at me... :'(  you're hurting my feelings... :'(







 :chuckle:

WELL YOU'LL JUST NEED TO GET THICKER SKIN PLAT, GET SOME SCALPS AND SEW'EM ON :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on August 09, 2016, 05:17:38 PM
Maybe they will drop all the charges. I would really hate to be the prosecutor and try to weigh the odds of one juror siding with the defense.  It may be expensive but I think the odds might be slightly favor the defendant when you only have to convince one of your peers.    :stirthepot:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Magnum_Willys on August 09, 2016, 05:27:46 PM
HOPEFULLY HES SITTING AT HOME WAITING FOR HIS DAY IN COURT, OR IN A JAIL CELL IF HES CONVICTED OF DOING WHAT HES BEEN CHARGED WITH.  :twocents:

look at all the burglars, thieves, habitual dwi's, assault convicts that are let loose because we don't have room to hold them and we want to lock up an old hunter who paid $50k to shoot a bull on property approved by the landowner ?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on August 09, 2016, 05:40:56 PM
HOPEFULLY HES SITTING AT HOME WAITING FOR HIS DAY IN COURT, OR IN A JAIL CELL IF HES CONVICTED OF DOING WHAT HES BEEN CHARGED WITH.  :twocents:

look at all the burglars, thieves, habitual dwi's, assault convicts that are let loose because we don't have room to hold them and we want to lock up an old hunter who paid $50k to shoot a bull on property approved by the landowner ?

PROBABLY NOT LONG TERM, JUST LONG ENOUGH TO TEACH HIM A GOOD LESSON, PLUS DETOUR ANY OTHER RICH LAZY FOLKS THINKING THEY CAN GET AWAY WITH STUFF BECAUSE THEY CAN RUN THE COURTS AROUND AND AROUND WITH THEIR WADS OF CASH. ;)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Alchase on August 09, 2016, 06:14:03 PM
HOPEFULLY HES SITTING AT HOME WAITING FOR HIS DAY IN COURT, OR IN A JAIL CELL IF HES CONVICTED OF DOING WHAT HES BEEN CHARGED WITH.  :twocents:

look at all the burglars, thieves, habitual dwi's, assault convicts that are let loose because we don't have room to hold them and we want to lock up an old hunter who paid $50k to shoot a bull on property approved by the landowner t?

we want to lock up an old hunter who paid $50k to "illegally shoot a branched antler bull in a closed GMU" on property approved by the landowner.

There fixed it for you!
LOL
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: mfswallace on August 10, 2016, 09:03:51 AM
Any update from court?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on August 10, 2016, 09:27:23 AM
Other
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: teanawayslayer on August 10, 2016, 09:48:52 AM
I saw he has court set for September now
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: HntnFsh on August 13, 2016, 10:11:08 AM
Interesting article in the Chronicle.
http://www.chronline.com/crime/trial-for-salkum-man-who-killed-bullwinkle-the-elk-moved/article_6a7f47a8-6100-11e6-b94f-43ae7bb86284.html
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Alchase on August 13, 2016, 03:19:29 PM
"The state has charged the key witness in Reichert’s defense, David Perkins, with second-degree aiding and abetting, or as a principal, to unlawful hunting. Perkins was Reichert’s disabled hunting companion."

LOL, looks like some past posters to this thread, were not being very truthful.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on August 13, 2016, 04:20:41 PM
"The state has charged the key witness in Reichert’s defense, David Perkins, with second-degree aiding and abetting, or as a principal, to unlawful hunting. Perkins was Reichert’s disabled hunting companion."

LOL, looks like some past posters to this thread, were not being very truthful.
Can you (the state) charge a "companion hunter" for aiding?  Are they acting as one under the WAC 232-12 definition? If he made the call to the WDFW on behalf of TR is it a strategic move by the prosecutor? I'll be curious to see the employee deposition as to how the situation played out.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Alchase on August 13, 2016, 04:53:16 PM
Depends on which story that we have been told you want to believe?
We were told he was not his guide. But this article states he was his disabled hunting companion. What does that mean, legally?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bob33 on August 13, 2016, 05:00:21 PM
Depends on which story that we have been told you want to believe?
We were told he was not his guide. But this article states he was his disabled hunting companion. What does that mean, legally?
It means he can legally assist him, including shooting for him.
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/wac/default.aspx?cite=232-12-828 (http://apps.leg.wa.gov/wac/default.aspx?cite=232-12-828)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: northwesthunter84 on August 13, 2016, 05:39:31 PM
So then whose tag went on the elk, wouldn't it have to be the disabled gentleman 's tag and not TR's tag. Based on the WAC he was taking it for the other hunters tag.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bigshooter on August 13, 2016, 05:47:53 PM
So then whose tag went on the elk, wouldn't it have to be the disabled gentleman 's tag and not TR's tag. Based on the WAC he was taking it for the other hunters tag.

TR is the disabled gentleman.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: northwesthunter84 on August 13, 2016, 06:11:46 PM
Thank you for the clarification, the person pulling the trigger should still be responsible for knowing the law. Also his defense sucks, he is a longtime Wa resident. I'm from Illinois and I understand the regs even before this issue came up. Hard to say there is no clarification when it's on the web and hard copy regs. Also seems he gets around fine, he hunts all over the country with gov/raffle tag,  what was the purpose of the companion.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bob33 on August 13, 2016, 06:39:16 PM
So then whose tag went on the elk, wouldn't it have to be the disabled gentleman 's tag and not TR's tag. Based on the WAC he was taking it for the other hunters tag.
Reichert had the tag. if Perkins were his legally designed companion, he could within certain guidelines shoot an animal for Reichert. Reichert's tag would go on the animal.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Troutdreamer on August 13, 2016, 07:31:10 PM
http://www.dailyrecordnews.com/news/bullwinkle-trial-moved-to-sept/article_40dfff1e-6bfe-56c1-8376-a90da9efc147.html



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on August 14, 2016, 08:19:32 AM
So then whose tag went on the elk, wouldn't it have to be the disabled gentleman 's tag and not TR's tag. Based on the WAC he was taking it for the other hunters tag.
Reichert had the tag. if Perkins were his legally designed companion, he could within certain guidelines shoot an animal for Reichert. Reichert's tag would go on the animal.
So to what extent are they acting as one and the same under said guidelines? Did the commission have the intent of companions, under certain guidelines, act for and as the "hunter"? Will Grants statement support Perkins?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bob33 on August 14, 2016, 08:23:58 AM
So then whose tag went on the elk, wouldn't it have to be the disabled gentleman 's tag and not TR's tag. Based on the WAC he was taking it for the other hunters tag.
Reichert had the tag. if Perkins were his legally designed companion, he could within certain guidelines shoot an animal for Reichert. Reichert's tag would go on the animal.
So to what extent are they acting as one and the same under said guidelines? Did the commission have the intent of companions, under certain guidelines, act for and as the "hunter"? Will Grants statement support Perkins?
The companion can do what the WAC allows:

"Designated hunter companion" means a person who assists or acts on behalf of a hunter with a disability in the stalking, shooting, tracking, retrieving, or tagging of game birds and game animals.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on August 16, 2016, 01:50:47 PM
So then whose tag went on the elk, wouldn't it have to be the disabled gentleman 's tag and not TR's tag. Based on the WAC he was taking it for the other hunters tag.

TR is the disabled gentleman.

HMMMMM, WALKS INTO COURT, I'M GUESSING HE COULD GET OUT OF A PICKUP IN A HAY FIELD AND WALK AS WELL.  :dunno:

BEFORE EVERYONE GET THEIR SHORTS IN A WRINKLE I KNOW THAT DISABILITIES HAVE DIFFERENT CLASSIFICATIONS.  ;)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Troutdreamer on August 29, 2016, 12:12:07 PM
http://www.dailyrecordnews.com/news/bullwinkle-trial-moved-to-oct/article_213d2bf0-b52a-5bbd-9091-cd8055168135.html
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: DaveMonti on August 29, 2016, 12:21:31 PM
Keep pushing it out. 

At this rate, he'll be able to buy next year's tags and plan on hunting next fall before the trial. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on August 29, 2016, 10:44:43 PM
Keep pushing it out. 

At this rate, he'll be able to buy next year's tags and plan on hunting next fall before the trial.

 Seems to be a effective strategy.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: boneaddict on August 30, 2016, 06:42:16 AM
or until everyone forgets about it and it just goes away
Title: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: time2hunt on August 30, 2016, 07:20:53 AM
Just a quick update it's not Tod pushing out the date!!! It's the prosecutions doing by charging the other guy with Tod  they the prosecution don't want him testifying against the State.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: DaveMonti on August 30, 2016, 09:18:48 AM
Regardless, it's just another example of how the system wastes time and money. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jrebel on August 30, 2016, 09:23:59 AM
Speaking of time and money......who won the bets earlier made in this topic / thread and who is writing a check for Youth turkey hunt contest??  I am pretty sure there were challenges made...someone had to have been wrong.   :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle:

Feel free to PM me so we can get this turkey contest funded like it has never been funded before.   :tup:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on August 30, 2016, 10:17:55 AM
Speaking of time and money......who won the bets earlier made in this topic / thread and who is writing a check for Youth turkey hunt contest??  I am pretty sure there were challenges made...someone had to have been wrong.   :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle:

Feel free to PM me so we can get this turkey contest funded like it has never been funded before.   :tup:
:yeah: :yeah: :IBCOOL:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: NOCK NOCK on August 30, 2016, 10:23:36 AM
I would venture to guess that one of those involved in the betting is probably saving money for their defense.  :dunno: :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Alchase on August 30, 2016, 10:46:36 AM
Would love to see the look on his face when he writes that check!
Of course every person who was threatened with lawsuit, should be able to be present as well.
LOL

I should say "hypothetical check" I find it just as hard to believe he would have the integrity to write that check, as it was to believe his misdirection.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on August 30, 2016, 02:45:55 PM
Just a quick update it's not Tod pushing out the date!!! It's the prosecutions doing by charging the other guy with Tod  they the prosecution don't want him testifying against the State.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Interesting.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: OutHouse on August 30, 2016, 03:05:26 PM
The prosecutor's choice to charge the other guy is A) justified as we know he is a liar--all calls to the game department are recorded and his wasn't i.e. it didn't happen and B) he can still testify in the defense of his friend but the questions asked of him need to be tailored as to not open the door on cross examination to questions that incriminate him. Practically speaking, the companion hunter's attorney is going to tell him not to testify at all. Either way that's probably a good thing because that fake story about the call to the game department is going to be impeached when a representative from the department testifies that the calls are recorded, and this conversation never took place. I do defense work and I can say beyond a shadow of a doubt that the attorney is hoping that someone on the jury is sympathetic to this old fool, and will not vote guilty. It's not a bad idea. If I were advising this fellow, I'd tell him there is plenty of evidence of guilt and you will likely be convicted, but maybe we can get someone on the jury who will feel sympathetic to you. Regardless of what happens, the old fart is a SMEAR on the reputation of all sportsmen.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: popeshawnpaul on August 30, 2016, 08:24:47 PM
The prosecutor's choice to charge the other guy is A) justified as we know he is a liar--all calls to the game department are recorded and his wasn't i.e. it didn't happen and B) he can still testify in the defense of his friend but the questions asked of him need to be tailored as to not open the door on cross examination to questions that incriminate him. Practically speaking, the companion hunter's attorney is going to tell him not to testify at all. Either way that's probably a good thing because that fake story about the call to the game department is going to be impeached when a representative from the department testifies that the calls are recorded, and this conversation never took place. I do defense work and I can say beyond a shadow of a doubt that the attorney is hoping that someone on the jury is sympathetic to this old fool, and will not vote guilty. It's not a bad idea. If I were advising this fellow, I'd tell him there is plenty of evidence of guilt and you will likely be convicted, but maybe we can get someone on the jury who will feel sympathetic to you. Regardless of what happens, the old fart is a SMEAR on the reputation of all sportsmen.

Except, the calls aren't recorded and weren't in this case...  We know from the WDFW affidavit there was a call but they disagree on what the conversation was about and the response.  TR decided to execute the speedy waiver and that was his choice.  He could call the witness and they could only shut him down on questions where he is admitting to a crime.  From his statement he did not commit a crime.  He can testify to much of what he was advised if they can get around heresay.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: OutHouse on August 31, 2016, 09:30:50 AM
The prosecutor's choice to charge the other guy is A) justified as we know he is a liar--all calls to the game department are recorded and his wasn't i.e. it didn't happen and B) he can still testify in the defense of his friend but the questions asked of him need to be tailored as to not open the door on cross examination to questions that incriminate him. Practically speaking, the companion hunter's attorney is going to tell him not to testify at all. Either way that's probably a good thing because that fake story about the call to the game department is going to be impeached when a representative from the department testifies that the calls are recorded, and this conversation never took place. I do defense work and I can say beyond a shadow of a doubt that the attorney is hoping that someone on the jury is sympathetic to this old fool, and will not vote guilty. It's not a bad idea. If I were advising this fellow, I'd tell him there is plenty of evidence of guilt and you will likely be convicted, but maybe we can get someone on the jury who will feel sympathetic to you. Regardless of what happens, the old fart is a SMEAR on the reputation of all sportsmen.

Except, the calls aren't recorded and weren't in this case...  We know from the WDFW affidavit there was a call but they disagree on what the conversation was about and the response.  TR decided to execute the speedy waiver and that was his choice.  He could call the witness and they could only shut him down on questions where he is admitting to a crime.  From his statement he did not commit a crime.  He can testify to much of what he was advised if they can get around heresay.

Except they won't get around hearsay with an exception and the only other reason to say what was said would be for the truth of the statement. They have a hearsay problem, no doubt. I don't know what he said, but there is a very good argument that he is an accomplice for aiding and abetting the crime that took place. His statement may not admit guilt, but the circumstances are perfect for the prosecutor to charge him as an accomplice. Of course, accomplice liability is the same as the liability of the principal. Both of their gooses are cooked, but like I said all he needs is one holdout juror.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on August 31, 2016, 08:10:32 PM
Speaking of time and money......who won the bets earlier made in this topic / thread and who is writing a check for Youth turkey hunt contest??  I am pretty sure there were challenges made...someone had to have been wrong.   :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle:

Feel free to PM me so we can get this turkey contest funded like it has never been funded before.   :tup:
:yeah: :yeah: :IBCOOL:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Pinetar on August 31, 2016, 08:21:23 PM
I believe CBoom lost a bet with me and owes some money to the Youth Turkey hunt but wasn't he banned? Or am I thinking of someone else?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on August 31, 2016, 08:26:20 PM
I believe CBoom lost a bet with me and owes some money to the Youth Turkey hunt but wasn't he banned? Or am I thinking of someone else?

 He's still a member, looks like he was on at 6:54 yesterday morning.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Pinetar on August 31, 2016, 08:29:48 PM
Good deal. He seemed like a man of his word. Hopefully he will come through and pay up. PM the man Jrebel
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on August 31, 2016, 08:31:25 PM
Good deal. He seemed like a man of his word.

Agreed
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on August 31, 2016, 08:38:16 PM
Good deal. He seemed like a man of his word.

Agreed

I must be missing it, but what bet did he lose?
(I thought it was he'd pay if TR was found guilty of poaching)?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bobcat on August 31, 2016, 08:47:08 PM
I think it was if Tod Reichert was charged.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Pinetar on August 31, 2016, 08:49:19 PM
He bet me that TR wouldn't even be charged. Can't remember how much but it was on one of "all" these posts lol

Pretty sure there were some other bets as well if someone knows how to find them :=)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: cboom on September 01, 2016, 12:43:40 AM
Good deal. He seemed like a man of his word. Hopefully he will come through and pay up. PM the man Jrebel

Glad this thread is back up top! Right, wrong,  or yet to be determined I did lose a bet on this thead. Figured I would have to go back and read 20 pages to  figure out how to pay up. So without looking through 20 or 66 pages! Who did I make that bet with? Was it Jrebel or  Pinetar?  Send me a PM and we will take care of it. Sorry  for being late on this, I did get banned for awhile. And as being on at 6:54 or whatever time last night, guess I was? All my computers as well as my phone are set for being logged on all the time?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: cboom on September 01, 2016, 12:58:17 AM
Good deal. He seemed like a man of his word.

Agreed

I must be missing it, but what bet did he lose?
(I thought it was he'd pay if TR was found guilty of poaching)?

That would have been the safer bet! I did say he wouldn't be charged. The $ will go for a good cause for kids.  I'd make make a bet any day when the kids win either way. I don't gamble at casinos, once in awhile play a very small time game of poker with friends. Really only try to make  bets when I feal like I don't lose either way no matter the outcome, unless it's a sure thing!  When I made this bet I already decided I should be donating  to a good thing like that. Might have done more if I won the bet!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: HntnFsh on September 01, 2016, 05:39:12 AM
 :tup:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: coachcw on September 01, 2016, 06:40:48 AM
that's stand up
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bearpaw on September 01, 2016, 06:43:57 AM
 :tup: :tup:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: teanawayslayer on September 01, 2016, 07:27:26 AM
Good deal. He seemed like a man of his word.


Agreed

I must be missing it, but what bet did he lose?
(I thought it was he'd pay if TR was found guilty of poaching)?

That would have been the safer bet! I did say he wouldn't be charged. The $ will go for a good cause for kids.  I'd make make a bet any day when the kids win either way. I don't gamble at casinos, once in awhile play a very small time game of poker with friends. Really only try to make  bets when I feal like I don't lose either way no matter the outcome, unless it's a sure thing!  When I made this bet I already decided I should be donating  to a good thing like that. Might have done more if I won the bet!
:tup:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: cboom on September 01, 2016, 07:45:38 AM
The prosecutor's choice to charge the other guy is A) justified as we know he is a liar--all calls to the game department are recorded and his wasn't i.e. it didn't happen and B) he can still testify in the defense of his friend but the questions asked of him need to be tailored as to not open the door on cross examination to questions that incriminate him. Practically speaking, the companion hunter's attorney is going to tell him not to testify at all. Either way that's probably a good thing because that fake story about the call to the game department is going to be impeached when a representative from the department testifies that the calls are recorded, and this conversation never took place. I do defense work and I can say beyond a shadow of a doubt that the attorney is hoping that someone on the jury is sympathetic to this old fool, and will not vote guilty. It's not a bad idea. If I were advising this fellow, I'd tell him there is plenty of evidence of guilt and you will likely be convicted, but maybe we can get someone on the jury who will feel sympathetic to you. Regardless of what happens, the old fart is a SMEAR on the reputation of all sportsmen.

We know the other guy is a liar? Who are you to make that statement and then bring in everybody else with the word we? We know you are not very bright. You say you do defense work, I guess you claim that if you are a janitor or something in a attorneys office. Clearly you are not a defense attorney,  or you would know not all calls in regional office's  are recorded.  Even Morgan Grant who the calls were made to doesn't deny they were made. Stick to cleaning the windows and let the big Kids do do the thinking.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on September 01, 2016, 08:15:11 AM
Good deal. He seemed like a man of his word.

Agreed

I must be missing it, but what bet did he lose?
(I thought it was he'd pay if TR was found guilty of poaching)?

That would have been the safer bet! I did say he wouldn't be charged. The $ will go for a good cause for kids.  I'd make make a bet any day when the kids win either way. I don't gamble at casinos, once in awhile play a very small time game of poker with friends. Really only try to make  bets when I feal like I don't lose either way no matter the outcome, unless it's a sure thing!  When I made this bet I already decided I should be donating  to a good thing like that. Might have done more if I won the bet!
:tup: Great way to look at it.  I really think the bet could have gone either way.  Good on you for donating to the kids.  This years hunt should be one of the best yet.  Thank you for your donation.  :tup:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Pinetar on September 01, 2016, 09:31:14 AM
Hey cboom, good to hear from ya and glad you are back. The bet was with me but like you, I do not remember how much it was as well. Maybe one of the mods knows how to find it? I thought it was in one of the locked up threads but I could be wrong.

I donate to the Youth Turkey Hunt every year and do it all through Jrebel, he's a stand up guy and I'm sure he will drop you a PM on where to send your donation. Thanks for the donation, it is going to a great cause.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Gringo31 on September 01, 2016, 09:36:00 AM
I'll go on a limb here and say cboom's contribution to the youth hunt may be the only real positive that comes out of this whole situation.

 :tup:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on September 01, 2016, 09:44:30 AM
Good deal. He seemed like a man of his word. Hopefully he will come through and pay up. PM the man Jrebel

Glad this thread is back up top! Right, wrong,  or yet to be determined I did lose a bet on this thead. Figured I would have to go back and read 20 pages to  figure out how to pay up. So without looking through 20 or 66 pages! Who did I make that bet with? Was it Jrebel or  Pinetar?  Send me a PM and we will take care of it. Sorry  for being late on this, I did get banned for awhile. And as being on at 6:54 or whatever time last night, guess I was? All my computers as well as my phone are set for being logged on all the time?
:tup:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: OutHouse on September 01, 2016, 09:48:26 AM
The prosecutor's choice to charge the other guy is A) justified as we know he is a liar--all calls to the game department are recorded and his wasn't i.e. it didn't happen and B) he can still testify in the defense of his friend but the questions asked of him need to be tailored as to not open the door on cross examination to questions that incriminate him. Practically speaking, the companion hunter's attorney is going to tell him not to testify at all. Either way that's probably a good thing because that fake story about the call to the game department is going to be impeached when a representative from the department testifies that the calls are recorded, and this conversation never took place. I do defense work and I can say beyond a shadow of a doubt that the attorney is hoping that someone on the jury is sympathetic to this old fool, and will not vote guilty. It's not a bad idea. If I were advising this fellow, I'd tell him there is plenty of evidence of guilt and you will likely be convicted, but maybe we can get someone on the jury who will feel sympathetic to you. Regardless of what happens, the old fart is a SMEAR on the reputation of all sportsmen.

We know the other guy is a liar? Who are you to make that statement and then bring in everybody else with the word we? We know you are not very bright. You say you do defense work, I guess you claim that if you are a janitor or something in a attorneys office. Clearly you are not a defense attorney,  or you would know not all calls in regional office's  are recorded.  Even Morgan Grant who the calls were made to doesn't deny they were made. Stick to cleaning the windows and let the big Kids do do the thinking.

You don't know anything about me. If I am wrong about the recording I can accept that. For your info, I am an attorney, I do defense work, and it takes a pretty bright person to finish in the top third of their law school class. You sound like a jealous person--the first thing you did was deny what I am, pretty funny actually. When I used the word "we" I wasn't including whiny, butt-hurt sympathizers like yourself. Even if I was a janitor--how is that a bad thing? You have shown everyone that you have disdain for people who do such work. In so doing, you revealed to everyone that you're a snob. You have embarrassed yourself with such childish attacks.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Alchase on September 01, 2016, 09:53:04 AM
I'll go on a limb here and say cboom's contribution to the youth hunt may be the only real positive that comes out of this whole situation.

 :tup:

only real positive that comes out of this whole situation, So far!!

Still waiting for the right thing to be done, LOL
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: DaveMonti on September 01, 2016, 09:56:24 AM
I see we are back to working on closing this thread, moving it to Off Topics, or banning some posters. 

Real quality. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on September 01, 2016, 09:59:52 AM
I'm wondering if Reichert's companion will get up in court and testify under oath that he called and got permission from WDFW? 

If he did not get permission, but told TR that shooting was permitted by WDFW, it would be fitting for TR to get off but the companion to be found guilty.  I don't know if that is a likely thing or not.........  :dunno:

In any event, I hope a trial does happen and the whole story gets told under oath. :twocents:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on September 01, 2016, 10:04:05 AM
I'm wondering if Reichert's companion will get up in court and testify under oath that he called and got permission from WDFW? 

If he did not get permission, but told TR that shooting was permitted by WDFW, it would be fitting for TR to get off but the companion to be found guilty.  I don't know if that is a likely thing or not.........  :dunno:

In any event, I hope a trial does happen and the whole story gets told under oath. :twocents:

 If your buddy told you it was okay for you to go kill a ram right now, and you did, do you actually believe you should not be held accountable, but your buddy should be? :dunno:

 Responsibility
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on September 01, 2016, 10:09:10 AM
I'm wondering if Reichert's companion will get up in court and testify under oath that he called and got permission from WDFW? 

If he did not get permission, but told TR that shooting was permitted by WDFW, it would be fitting for TR to get off but the companion to be found guilty.  I don't know if that is a likely thing or not.........  :dunno:

In any event, I hope a trial does happen and the whole story gets told under oath. :twocents:

 If your buddy told you it was okay for you to go kill a ram right now, and you did, do you actually believe you should not be held accountable, but your buddy should be? :dunno:

 Responsibility

Exactly.  I think he should be found guilty.  But in a jury trial anything can happen.  They can get a sympathetic juror to take pity on the old disabled hunter that was led astray by his friend that supposedly got permission from wdfw.  (I wouldn't buy the song and dance from the defense attorney, but I can possibly see some jurors buying it).
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on September 01, 2016, 10:14:56 AM
I'm wondering if Reichert's companion will get up in court and testify under oath that he called and got permission from WDFW? 

If he did not get permission, but told TR that shooting was permitted by WDFW, it would be fitting for TR to get off but the companion to be found guilty.  I don't know if that is a likely thing or not.........  :dunno:

In any event, I hope a trial does happen and the whole story gets told under oath. :twocents:

 If your buddy told you it was okay for you to go kill a ram right now, and you did, do you actually believe you should not be held accountable, but your buddy should be? :dunno:

 Responsibility

Exactly.  I think he should be found guilty.  But in a jury trial anything can happen.  They can get a sympathetic juror to take pity on the old disabled hunter that was led astray by his friend that supposedly got permission from wdfw.  (I wouldn't buy the song and dance from the defense attorney, but I can possibly see some jurors buying it).

 I'd hope that out of a jury there would be at least one person that could intelligently explain "responsibility", even to a bleeding heart type. :dunno:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Alchase on September 01, 2016, 10:20:04 AM
And if the buddy was a "companion hunter" they should be like twinzies, and both be "held responsible" and accountable.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bobcat on September 01, 2016, 10:25:23 AM
The other guy was a hunting guide, so a person would be reasonable to put a little more faith in his word than just any random person. Not only was he a guide, but he was a local to the area, and you would expect that he'd be fully aware that the GMU was not open to the hunting of branch antler bull elk. I could see why Reichert might believe him when he said it was all legal. I don't know if Reichert truly believed he wasn't violating the law, but it's not a stretch of the imagination to think that he might have put his trust in the "guide."

On another note, I'm confused as to why he's being referred to as the "companion hunter." The only reason for that would be so the companion could shoot the bull for the "disabled" hunter. Of course there's no chance Reichert would let someone kill his trophy bull for him, so I don't get why they're claiming the guide was a companion hunter.   :dunno:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on September 01, 2016, 10:29:12 AM
Maybe they are referring to him as a "companion" hunter to give sympathy toward Reichert being disabled?  Or maybe he doesn't want to be called his "guide" for some reason?   :dunno:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on September 01, 2016, 10:31:51 AM
The other guy was a hunting guide, so a person would be reasonable to put a little more faith in his word than just any random person. Not only was he a guide, but he was a local to the area, and you would expect that he'd be fully aware that the GMU was not open to the hunting of branch antler bull elk. I could see why Reichert might believe him when he said it was all legal. I don't know if Reichert truly believed he wasn't violating the law, but it's not a stretch of the imagination to think that he might have put his trust in the "guide."

On another note, I'm confused as to why he's being referred to as the "companion hunter." The only reason for that would be so the companion could shoot the bull for the "disabled" hunter. Of course there's no chance Reichert would let someone kill his trophy bull for him, so I don't get why they're claiming the guide was a companion hunter.   :dunno:

 That might be believable had this been Todds first rodeo...but it wasn't!

 I'm quite sure Todd is/was well aware of the "ins and outs" of that tag. :twocents:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on September 01, 2016, 10:32:14 AM
Hey, on another note, seeing how it is Sept 1st today, I wonder if TR is stalking a bull right now as we sit here in Hunt-Wa?  I'm not jealous, but I do wish I was out hunting branch bull elk right now instead of sitting inside behind a computer. :(
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: cboom on September 01, 2016, 11:30:01 AM
The prosecutor's choice to charge the other guy is A) justified as we know he is a liar--all calls to the game department are recorded and his wasn't i.e. it didn't happen and B) he can still testify in the defense of his friend but the questions asked of him need to be tailored as to not open the door on cross examination to questions that incriminate him. Practically speaking, the companion hunter's attorney is going to tell him not to testify at all. Either way that's probably a good thing because that fake story about the call to the game department is going to be impeached when a representative from the department testifies that the calls are recorded, and this conversation never took place. I do defense work and I can say beyond a shadow of a doubt that the attorney is hoping that someone on the jury is sympathetic to this old fool, and will not vote guilty. It's not a bad idea. If I were advising this fellow, I'd tell him there is plenty of evidence of guilt and you will likely be convicted, but maybe we can get someone on the jury who will feel sympathetic to you. Regardless of what happens, the old fart is a SMEAR on the reputation of all sportsmen.

We know the other guy is a liar? Who are you to make that statement and then bring in everybody else with the word we? We know you are not very bright. You say you do defense work, I guess you claim that if you are a janitor or something in a attorneys office. Clearly you are not a defense attorney,  or you would know not all calls in regional office's  are recorded.  Even Morgan Grant who the calls were made to doesn't deny they were made. Stick to cleaning the windows and let the big Kids do do the thinking.

You don't know anything about me. If I am wrong about the recording I can accept that. For your info, I am an attorney, I do defense work, and it takes a pretty bright person to finish in the top third of their law school class. You sound like a jealous person--the first thing you did was deny what I am, pretty funny actually. When I used the word "we" I wasn't including whiny, butt-hurt sympathizers like yourself. Even if I was a janitor--how is that a bad thing? You have shown everyone that you have disdain for people who do such work. In so doing, you revealed to everyone that you're a snob. You have embarrassed yourself with such childish attacks.

Wow! You call a person that you don't know, or know anything about a liar publicly on a forum. A guy who bravely served this county in the armed forces. And I sound like a jeleous person? You really are a special kind of special. And no I have no problem at all with janitors or any other honest profession. Was just pointing out you clearly are not an attorney or at the very least a poor one. A good one would not be making flat out false statements like you did on a public forum.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on September 01, 2016, 11:32:41 AM
Hey, on another note, seeing how it is Sept 1st today, I wonder if TR is stalking a bull right now as we sit here in Hunt-Wa?  I'm not jealous, but I do wish I was out hunting branch bull elk right now instead of sitting inside behind a computer. :(
I know if I had that tag I would be out there knocking down a big one today for sure.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: OutHouse on September 01, 2016, 12:02:54 PM
The prosecutor's choice to charge the other guy is A) justified as we know he is a liar--all calls to the game department are recorded and his wasn't i.e. it didn't happen and B) he can still testify in the defense of his friend but the questions asked of him need to be tailored as to not open the door on cross examination to questions that incriminate him. Practically speaking, the companion hunter's attorney is going to tell him not to testify at all. Either way that's probably a good thing because that fake story about the call to the game department is going to be impeached when a representative from the department testifies that the calls are recorded, and this conversation never took place. I do defense work and I can say beyond a shadow of a doubt that the attorney is hoping that someone on the jury is sympathetic to this old fool, and will not vote guilty. It's not a bad idea. If I were advising this fellow, I'd tell him there is plenty of evidence of guilt and you will likely be convicted, but maybe we can get someone on the jury who will feel sympathetic to you. Regardless of what happens, the old fart is a SMEAR on the reputation of all sportsmen.

We know the other guy is a liar? Who are you to make that statement and then bring in everybody else with the word we? We know you are not very bright. You say you do defense work, I guess you claim that if you are a janitor or something in a attorneys office. Clearly you are not a defense attorney,  or you would know not all calls in regional office's  are recorded.  Even Morgan Grant who the calls were made to doesn't deny they were made. Stick to cleaning the windows and let the big Kids do do the thinking.

You don't know anything about me. If I am wrong about the recording I can accept that. For your info, I am an attorney, I do defense work, and it takes a pretty bright person to finish in the top third of their law school class. You sound like a jealous person--the first thing you did was deny what I am, pretty funny actually. When I used the word "we" I wasn't including whiny, butt-hurt sympathizers like yourself. Even if I was a janitor--how is that a bad thing? You have shown everyone that you have disdain for people who do such work. In so doing, you revealed to everyone that you're a snob. You have embarrassed yourself with such childish attacks.

Wow! You call a person that you don't know, or know anything about a liar publicly on a forum. A guy who bravely served this county in the armed forces. And I sound like a jeleous person? You really are a special kind of special. And no I have no problem at all with janitors or any other honest profession. Was just pointing out you clearly are not an attorney or at the very least a poor one. A good one would not be making flat out false statements like you did on a public forum.

Again, you're not saving any face here. I accepted that my statement could be wrong, yet you showed your true colors about how you feel about people who work certain jobs. You called me a janitor as an insult--it's plainly obvious from the comment (talk about a special kind of special as you say). Taking it back is too little too late, and its there for anyone to read. You reveal a lot about yourself when you write without thinking. I can comment on public topics just like anyone else and if I am wrong I can accept that. It's obvious that you are just a whiny sympathizer. And by they way, if I am such a bad attorney then I wouldn't be making a ton of money from happy clients three years out of law school. I'll let my client's and my bank account speak to that. I may have been wrong in the beginning, but now I am having fun picking apart your nonsense commentary!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on September 01, 2016, 12:12:07 PM
I see we are back to working on closing this thread, moving it to Off Topics, or banning some posters. 

Real quality.
:yeah:

Can we stop with the name calling, comparing bank accounts or organ size? How does any of that relate to the topic?  :dunno:

A phone call was made and Grant Morgan gave his side of the phone call in the report.  There was no mention of a recording in the report, not to say one doesn't exist.  The WDFW may have one and the defense may have it recorded some how.  I am sure there is another version of that call that hopefully will be brought out in the trial.  If there is no recording somewhere in the middle of those two versions is where the truth probably lies.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: OutHouse on September 01, 2016, 12:55:15 PM
I see we are back to working on closing this thread, moving it to Off Topics, or banning some posters. 

Real quality.
:yeah:

Can we stop with the name calling, comparing bank accounts or organ size? How does any of that relate to the topic?  :dunno:

A phone call was made and Grant Morgan gave his side of the phone call in the report.  There was no mention of a recording in the report, not to say one doesn't exist.  The WDFW may have one and the defense may have it recorded some how.  I am sure there is another version of that call that hopefully will be brought out in the trial.  If there is no recording somewhere in the middle of those two versions is where the truth probably lies.

You're right. I'm done replying to the sympathizer. He thought calling someone a janitor as an insult didn't reflect his negative feelings about people who work that job. Had to set him straight.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on September 01, 2016, 01:21:50 PM
The Cboom/Pinetar bet was $100 to the youth turkey hunt fund. Hope that helps.

(http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160901/297380718a948a68a76c2ff7cdac52c4.jpg)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: cboom on September 01, 2016, 01:25:30 PM
The Cboom/Pinetar bet was $100 to the youth turkey hunt fund. Hope that helps.

(http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160901/297380718a948a68a76c2ff7cdac52c4.jpg)

  :tup:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: popeshawnpaul on September 02, 2016, 09:34:10 AM
The prosecutor's choice to charge the other guy is A) justified as we know he is a liar--all calls to the game department are recorded and his wasn't i.e. it didn't happen and B) he can still testify in the defense of his friend but the questions asked of him need to be tailored as to not open the door on cross examination to questions that incriminate him. Practically speaking, the companion hunter's attorney is going to tell him not to testify at all. Either way that's probably a good thing because that fake story about the call to the game department is going to be impeached when a representative from the department testifies that the calls are recorded, and this conversation never took place. I do defense work and I can say beyond a shadow of a doubt that the attorney is hoping that someone on the jury is sympathetic to this old fool, and will not vote guilty. It's not a bad idea. If I were advising this fellow, I'd tell him there is plenty of evidence of guilt and you will likely be convicted, but maybe we can get someone on the jury who will feel sympathetic to you. Regardless of what happens, the old fart is a SMEAR on the reputation of all sportsmen.

Except, the calls aren't recorded and weren't in this case...  We know from the WDFW affidavit there was a call but they disagree on what the conversation was about and the response.  TR decided to execute the speedy waiver and that was his choice.  He could call the witness and they could only shut him down on questions where he is admitting to a crime.  From his statement he did not commit a crime.  He can testify to much of what he was advised if they can get around heresay.

Except they won't get around hearsay with an exception and the only other reason to say what was said would be for the truth of the statement. They have a hearsay problem, no doubt. I don't know what he said, but there is a very good argument that he is an accomplice for aiding and abetting the crime that took place. His statement may not admit guilt, but the circumstances are perfect for the prosecutor to charge him as an accomplice. Of course, accomplice liability is the same as the liability of the principal. Both of their gooses are cooked, but like I said all he needs is one holdout juror.

I've had thousands of statements admitted in court.  Much of what was said can come in.  Probably all if you are a savvy enough attorney but we won't go into that.  Now that this co-defendant is charged many of the statements are an admission by a party-opponent under ER 801(d)(2) and not hearsay at all.  Further, the statement from WDFW to the co-defendant would not be used to prove the truth of the matter asserted for TR in his case.

It's all pointless as TR will undoubtedly play the victim with the co-D being charged, kill a big bull any day with his special tag, and take the diversion agreement.  He won't hunt for a year and have this dismissed next fall before the end of hunting season and kill another bull next year.  If it doesn't go down that way I would be flabbergasted.  As for the co-D, that's a different analysis.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on September 02, 2016, 09:45:08 AM
Would you say the co-D is up the proverbial creek with out a paddle or the money to buy a paddle?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on September 02, 2016, 11:27:42 AM
One more time, let's keep this on topic.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: rosscrazyelk on September 03, 2016, 07:22:34 PM
Am I reading this right, Riechert has the tag again?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on September 03, 2016, 08:05:03 PM
Am I reading this right, Riechert has the tag again?
Where ya been?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on September 04, 2016, 03:14:55 PM
Am I reading this right, Riechert has the tag again?
It's hard to sift through some of this thread but yes he has the tag this year here and in Pennsylvania.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: teanawayslayer on September 06, 2016, 07:21:05 PM
And south central combo
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on September 06, 2016, 08:00:58 PM
And south central combo
really? That's what bullwinkle was shot with correct?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JakeLand on September 06, 2016, 08:44:31 PM
Makes no sense   :dunno: how is it possible that he's able to hunt or fish with charges pending on a wildlife violation
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: HntnFsh on September 07, 2016, 03:04:13 AM
Makes no sense   :dunno: how is it possible that he's able to hunt or fish with charges pending on a wildlife violation

Because he hasn't been convicted of anything yet.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: TVHunts on September 07, 2016, 03:33:35 AM
Makes no sense   :dunno: how is it possible that he's able to hunt or fish with charges pending on a wildlife violation

Agreed, it doesn't make sense.  But, it does speak volumes of a mans character that has been involved in 2 serious violation incidents yet he feels no shame and continues to go out and keep purchasing high dollar tags. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: coachcw on September 07, 2016, 06:12:31 AM
and the auction tag
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: fishngamereaper on September 07, 2016, 06:23:32 AM
He needs to be assigned a personal game warden to tag along on all his hunts.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: floatinghat on September 07, 2016, 10:19:27 AM
He needs to be assigned a personal game warden to tag along on all his hunts.

More like a videographer
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Alchase on September 07, 2016, 10:23:16 AM
I bet the WDFW has his, and his "companion, not guide" cell phone numbers on record, so they know not to answer when they call again!

Just sayin
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Miles on September 07, 2016, 10:34:07 AM
Makes no sense   :dunno: how is it possible that he's able to hunt or fish with charges pending on a wildlife violation

Agreed, it doesn't make sense.  But, it does speak volumes of a mans character that has been involved in 2 serious violation incidents yet he feels no shame and continues to go out and keep purchasing high dollar tags. 


Innocent until proven guilty, that's how. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: popeshawnpaul on September 07, 2016, 10:37:27 AM
Makes no sense   :dunno: how is it possible that he's able to hunt or fish with charges pending on a wildlife violation

Agreed, it doesn't make sense.  But, it does speak volumes of a mans character that has been involved in 2 serious violation incidents yet he feels no shame and continues to go out and keep purchasing high dollar tags. 


Innocent until proven guilty, that's how.

Crazy concept!    :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on September 07, 2016, 10:41:56 AM
Makes no sense   :dunno: how is it possible that he's able to hunt or fish with charges pending on a wildlife violation

Agreed, it doesn't make sense.  But, it does speak volumes of a mans character that has been involved in 2 serious violation incidents yet he feels no shame and continues to go out and keep purchasing high dollar tags. 


Innocent until proven guilty, that's how.
Bullwinkle is dead, nothing can be done about that.

If proven guilty it isn't fair that he is still hunting but that's the system.

Good news is he spent a ton more money on the auction tag and raffle tags this year and in the end that is good for wildlife.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bobcat on September 07, 2016, 10:49:08 AM
Innocent until proven guilty only applies for those who have lots of money. Otherwise, you would expect, like most anyone else, the rifle used to kill the bull would have been confiscated, the bull itself would have been taken, perhaps even the vehicle Reichert used when he was "hunting" this bull would have been taken. You hear about property being confiscated all the time in poaching cases. Funny how that didn't happen in this case.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Alchase on September 07, 2016, 10:52:53 AM
Innocent until proven guilty only applies for those who have lots of money. Otherwise, you would expect, like most anyone else, the rifle used to kill the bull would have been confiscated, the bull itself would have been taken, perhaps even the vehicle Reichert used when he was "hunting" this bull would have been taken. You hear about property being confiscated all the time in poaching cases. Funny how that didn't happen in this case.

Bingo!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kentrek on September 07, 2016, 10:53:47 AM
Innocent until proven guilty only applies for those who have lots of money.

Really  :dunno:

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bobcat on September 07, 2016, 10:56:17 AM
Innocent until proven guilty only applies for those who have lots of money.

Really  :dunno:

Yes, that's the reality of it. Another example is people who have their right to possess firearms taken away before being convicted of any crime.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on September 07, 2016, 11:05:37 AM
Innocent until proven guilty only applies for those who have lots of money. Otherwise, you would expect, like most anyone else, the rifle used to kill the bull would have been confiscated, the bull itself would have been taken, perhaps even the vehicle Reichert used when he was "hunting" this bull would have been taken. You hear about property being confiscated all the time in poaching cases. Funny how that didn't happen in this case.
We are talking about a trophy bull elk being taken by a guy that spends a lot of money each year at auctions and in the raffle.

This isn't @rtspring being accused of shooting a 2 pt deer in a 3 pt area where he lost his rifle in the shuffle.  This is way less significant than that.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: rtspring on September 07, 2016, 11:19:53 AM
Innocent until proven guilty only applies for those who have lots of money. Otherwise, you would expect, like most anyone else, the rifle used to kill the bull would have been confiscated, the bull itself would have been taken, perhaps even the vehicle Reichert used when he was "hunting" this bull would have been taken. You hear about property being confiscated all the time in poaching cases. Funny how that didn't happen in this case.
We are talking about a trophy bull elk being taken by a guy that spends a lot of money each year at auctions and in the raffle.

This isn't @rtspring being accused of shooting a 2 pt deer in a 3 pt area where he lost his rifle in the shuffle.  This is way less significant than that.

Lets not forget, they took my tag too!  On the spot I could no longer hunt!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: WAPatriot on September 07, 2016, 11:21:31 AM
I love how everyone on here is so jealous of TR. Work your ass off and you can buy hunting opportunities. There is an unlimited about of money to be made in this world.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Alchase on September 07, 2016, 11:23:51 AM
Quote
We are talking about a trophy bull elk being POACHED by a guy that spends a lot of money each year at auctions and in the raffle.
And has a history of flaunting hunting regulations.

Fixed it for you

The amount of money he spends on raffles and auctions should have no more bearing on this case then how much he spends on underwear.....

Shooting a 2 point in a 3 point or better GMU
or
Shooting a trophy branched antler bull in a closed GMU

both = poaching

Why are you trying to diminish what he is accused of?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on September 07, 2016, 11:25:46 AM
Innocent until proven guilty only applies for those who have lots of money. Otherwise, you would expect, like most anyone else, the rifle used to kill the bull would have been confiscated, the bull itself would have been taken, perhaps even the vehicle Reichert used when he was "hunting" this bull would have been taken. You hear about property being confiscated all the time in poaching cases. Funny how that didn't happen in this case.
We are talking about a trophy bull elk being taken by a guy that spends a lot of money each year at auctions and in the raffle.

This isn't @rtspring being accused of shooting a 2 pt deer in a 3 pt area where he lost his rifle in the shuffle.  This is way less significant than that.

Lets not forget, they took my tag too!  On the spot I could no longer hunt!
:yike: It is obvious there are different rules for different people.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on September 07, 2016, 11:27:54 AM
Quote
We are talking about a trophy bull elk being POACHED by a guy that spends a lot of money each year at auctions and in the raffle.
And has a history of flaunting hunting regulations.

Fixed it for you

The amount of money he spends on raffles and auctions should have no more bearing on this case then how much he spends on underwear.....

Shooting a 2 point in a 3 point or better GMU
or
Shooting a trophy branched antler bull in a closed GMU

both = poaching

Why are you trying to diminish what he is accused of?
We need a sarcasm emoji.  :sry:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: WAPatriot on September 07, 2016, 11:30:00 AM
Jealous Internet jockies need to get a life. If you ain't got the money you have to hunt harder for trophy animals. Some of you guys are pathetic *censored*s. Leave the man alone he's a hunter and a Stuard to the environment. You don't know what happened and the state ain't charging him so go hump a tree.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on September 07, 2016, 11:41:26 AM
Jealous Internet jockies need to get a life. If you ain't got the money you have to hunt harder for trophy animals. Some of you guys are pathetic *censored*s. Leave the man alone he's a hunter and a Stuard to the environment. You don't know what happened and the state ain't charging him so go hump a tree.

The state has already charged him. That's why they're going through the trial process.

:dunno:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on September 07, 2016, 11:43:57 AM
What is a "Stuard"? And the state doesn't charge people, it is up to the county......... I think the state recommended prosecution and did the investigation and brought the evidence to the county prosecutor.

And everyone that has read these threads on here and the news articles have a pretty good idea what happened.  He shot a branched bull in a unit that was not open.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on September 07, 2016, 11:47:11 AM
Jealous Internet jockies need to get a life. If you ain't got the money you have to hunt harder for trophy animals. Some of you guys are pathetic *censored*s. Leave the man alone he's a hunter and a Stuard to the environment. You don't know what happened and the state ain't charging him so go hump a tree.
He has been charged and I think the discussion about different standards for different income levels is a valid one.

I don't think it can be argued whether he has been charged that is a fact.

I also think that it is tough to argue that people with more money don't take a different path than the average joe when accused of a crime.

I would love to hear your side of the argument on whether he has been charged or not and also your thoughts on different income levels being treated differently in the legal process.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: WAPatriot on September 07, 2016, 11:55:31 AM
Convicted charged whatever you want to call it it's irrelevant cause in the end he's still gonna hunt and kill bigger bulls than you or I. Unlike you complainers I look at this as a prime example of why I need to work harder and make more money. I would absolutely love it if some Rich guy rented 30 helocopers and put a dent in some wolves.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Alchase on September 07, 2016, 12:05:54 PM
Quote
We are talking about a trophy bull elk being POACHED by a guy that spends a lot of money each year at auctions and in the raffle.
And has a history of flaunting hunting regulations.

Fixed it for you

The amount of money he spends on raffles and auctions should have no more bearing on this case then how much he spends on underwear.....

Shooting a 2 point in a 3 point or better GMU
or
Shooting a trophy branched antler bull in a closed GMU

both = poaching

Why are you trying to diminish what he is accused of?
We need a sarcasm emoji.  :sry:

No problem, my sarcasm reader seems to be broken lately, LOL
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: BULLBLASTER on September 07, 2016, 12:10:28 PM
Here we go again.... We're all back to being broke jelous whiners....  :tup:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Blacktail Sniper on September 07, 2016, 12:16:19 PM
I hate it when that happens.....
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: klickman on September 07, 2016, 03:36:27 PM
Innocent until proven guilty only applies for those who have lots of money. Otherwise, you would expect, like most anyone else, the rifle used to kill the bull would have been confiscated, the bull itself would have been taken, perhaps even the vehicle Reichert used when he was "hunting" this bull would have been taken. You hear about property being confiscated all the time in poaching cases. Funny how that didn't happen in this case.

They confiscated the bull at his court appearance yesterday.  Not sure about the weapon or any other property. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on September 07, 2016, 03:57:40 PM
Innocent until proven guilty only applies for those who have lots of money. Otherwise, you would expect, like most anyone else, the rifle used to kill the bull would have been confiscated, the bull itself would have been taken, perhaps even the vehicle Reichert used when he was "hunting" this bull would have been taken. You hear about property being confiscated all the time in poaching cases. Funny how that didn't happen in this case.

They confiscated the bull at his court appearance yesterday.  Not sure about the weapon or any other property.
:yike: This has gone a lot farther than I would have guessed it would.  I am glad they are going the whole way but definitely surprised.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on September 07, 2016, 04:32:10 PM
Here we go again.... We're all back to being broke jelous whiners....  :tup:

NOT BROKE, JEALOUS, OR A WHINER. JUST DON'T LIKE TO SETS OF STANDARDS FOR LAW BREAKERS. AND I'M NOT SAYING RT WAS A LAW BREAKER.

THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS IF YOU ARN'T RICH AND GET ACCUSED OF SOMETHING WHILE HUNTING, SEE BELOW THREAD IF YOU HAVEN'T SEEN IT BEFORE. :bash:

http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,87690.275.html
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: DaveMonti on September 07, 2016, 05:06:58 PM
Quote
We are talking about a trophy bull elk being POACHED by a guy that spends a lot of money each year at auctions and in the raffle.
And has a history of flaunting hunting regulations.

Fixed it for you

The amount of money he spends on raffles and auctions should have no more bearing on this case then how much he spends on underwear.....

Shooting a 2 point in a 3 point or better GMU
or
Shooting a trophy branched antler bull in a closed GMU

both = poaching

Why are you trying to diminish what he is accused of?
We need a sarcasm emoji.  :sry:

I got it Rick, but not everyone has met you!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: popeshawnpaul on September 07, 2016, 05:07:49 PM
Innocent until proven guilty only applies for those who have lots of money. Otherwise, you would expect, like most anyone else, the rifle used to kill the bull would have been confiscated, the bull itself would have been taken, perhaps even the vehicle Reichert used when he was "hunting" this bull would have been taken. You hear about property being confiscated all the time in poaching cases. Funny how that didn't happen in this case.

They confiscated the bull at his court appearance yesterday.  Not sure about the weapon or any other property.

Surprised they didn't execute a search warrant on it sooner.  It's usually one of the first things they do.  If the continuance/diversion agreement is conditional upon forfeiture of the bull, that would be the only reason I could see why they would not accept the agreement.  The next scheduling conference is Sept. 27 with possible motions October 13.  The defense waived speedy trial through December and set a tentative trial for December.  Getting further along here.

As for the people with $ vs those without...I can see a disparity at times in court.  However, I also see it go the other way with the experienced public defender getting better deal than clueless private attorneys.  Selecting an attorney is like selecting a burger.  You can get good cheap ones, good expensive ones, bad cheap ones, and bad expensive ones.  3 of the 5 best trial attorneys I know are public defense attorneys...
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Jpmiller on September 08, 2016, 06:43:57 AM
I wonder when the picture of this year's monster elk will be showing up in here. Hopefully it at least doesn't have ellensburg in the background 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bob33 on September 08, 2016, 07:09:18 AM
No decision was made on whether to join the trials of Tod Reichert and David Perkins on Tuesday in Kittitas County Lower District Court, pushing back the trial date to Dec. 2.

Reichert, 76, is charged with second-degree unlawful hunting of big game, a gross misdemeanor, which can carry the possibility of fines and a two-year suspension of his hunting privileges. He has pleaded not guilty. The Salkum man is accused of shooting a well-known local elk called Bullwinkle in an area closed to hunting branch-antler elk.

Reichert’s companion hunter and key witness, local hunting guide David Perkins, faces charges of second-degree aiding and abetting, or as a principal, to unlawful hunting. Reichert is considered a disabled hunter and is allowed to have a companion hunter.

Yakima-based attorney Ken Therrien, representing Perkins, said he needed more time to go over discovery materials before deciding on whether to join the trials.

The state also has the option to object to the joinder.

With a later court date, Reichert could potentially use elk tags with special privileges purchased at an auction earlier this year. Reichert was originally subject to a hunting ban imposed by Kittitas County District Court Judge Jim Hurson earlier this year, although the ban was lifted at a July 27 court date.

The Spokesman-Review reported that Reichert bid $75,000 for the 2016 Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife’s special eastside elk auction tag.

Bullwinkle the elk was well known in the Fairview District near Ellensburg, and was known to wander around hay fields and yards.

The court has set the trial date for Perkins and Reichert on Dec. 2. A pre-trial hearing is scheduled for Oct. 13 when a decision on a joinder is expected.

http://www.dailyrecordnews.com/news/bullwinkle-trial-pushed-to-dec/article_16a9bee5-2f01-51d8-a506-ca12397e167b.html (http://www.dailyrecordnews.com/news/bullwinkle-trial-pushed-to-dec/article_16a9bee5-2f01-51d8-a506-ca12397e167b.html)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: DaveMonti on September 08, 2016, 09:24:11 AM
This typical cluster will still be pending a year from now when the charged party is hunting on next year's tags.  Just keep delaying the trial date, filing this and that and costing money.  Someone should set up a pool as to when the trial actually occurs. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: popeshawnpaul on September 08, 2016, 10:19:38 AM
This typical cluster will still be pending a year from now when the charged party is hunting on next year's tags.  Just keep delaying the trial date, filing this and that and costing money.  Someone should set up a pool as to when the trial actually occurs.

Not going to happen.  It doesn't work that way in most scenarios.  The prosecutors get paid salary whether they work this case or not.  The court has this calendar whether this case was filed or not. 

On another note, as a defendant you usually don't want your case joined as it can prejudice a jury against your client.  In this case, it's possible you want them joined so if the jury tried to "mitigate" the situation by finding the more culpable person guilty of something (Perkins?) they might be willing to let someone walk.  It will be interesting to explore this thought as the case proceeds.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Alchase on September 08, 2016, 11:16:43 AM
They testify against each other if they are joined can they?

If not, that seems to be in their favor to join?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jmscon on October 30, 2016, 10:46:58 PM
Think he has filled his tag yet?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: coachcw on October 31, 2016, 06:14:05 AM
I know the Sheep went down , not sure on the elk or deer . playing out perfect for him by dec he will be tagged out . maybe ironed out before he loads the pot for next years raffle .
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jdb on October 31, 2016, 06:24:46 AM
Any idea where he killed the sheep coach? I ran into him twice on the yakima river and he passed on two pretty good rams that day.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on October 31, 2016, 08:10:09 AM
Pennsylvania bull is dead I heard.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on October 31, 2016, 08:23:53 AM
Any idea where he killed the sheep coach? I ran into him twice on the yakima river and he passed on two pretty good rams that day.

Eaton Ranch
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on October 31, 2016, 08:56:00 AM
Lies, if there were dead animals out there with him straddling them the pics would be posted here and since I don't see pics it's lies. :o
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on October 31, 2016, 09:07:46 AM
Any idea where he killed the sheep coach? I ran into him twice on the yakima river and he passed on two pretty good rams that day.

Eaton Ranch
You sure about that?   :dunno:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on October 31, 2016, 09:12:48 AM
Any idea where he killed the sheep coach? I ran into him twice on the yakima river and he passed on two pretty good rams that day.

Eaton Ranch
You sure about that?   :dunno:

I heard it from about eight different independent sources, so no I am not 100% certain of that, but that is what I have heard. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on October 31, 2016, 10:43:42 AM
Eaton in 142?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bobcat on October 31, 2016, 10:51:02 AM
I think it was Selah Butte.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on October 31, 2016, 10:51:20 AM
Eaton in 142?

I believe that's the name of the gentleman who owns a bunch of property in the Yakima river canyon area, east side of the highway I believe?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on October 31, 2016, 11:16:30 AM
Eaton in 142?

I believe that's the name of the gentleman who owns a bunch of property in the Yakima river canyon area, east side of the highway I believe?
That makes sense.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on October 31, 2016, 11:19:26 AM
Eaton in 142?

I believe that's the name of the gentleman who owns a bunch of property in the Yakima river canyon area, east side of the highway I believe?
Is that the one with the access fee?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on October 31, 2016, 11:57:49 AM
Eaton ranch spans a lot of the Canyon Road east side of the road from the river.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on October 31, 2016, 11:57:58 AM
Eaton in 142?

I believe that's the name of the gentleman who owns a bunch of property in the Yakima river canyon area, east side of the highway I believe?
Is that the one with the access fee?

Yes
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on October 31, 2016, 12:18:04 PM
I hear that's where the big ones are.  Any sheep would be the biggest one on my wall.  Someone would have to hold my bullets to make sure I got a decent sheep.  I wouldn't need the biggest in the unit, just a nice sheep would be awesome.  I would actually try to do it with my bow and would have a muzzy as back up.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: boneaddict on October 31, 2016, 04:09:00 PM
i was looking for the buck he was hunting for.  I didnt find it, but I dont have the access that he does. :)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on October 31, 2016, 04:28:42 PM
Eaton in 142?

I believe that's the name of the gentleman who owns a bunch of property in the Yakima river canyon area, east side of the highway I believe?
That makes sense.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: popeshawnpaul on November 23, 2016, 08:43:18 AM
A lot has happened this month but the long and short of it is the trial was continued to 2/10/17.  Motions were heard to join the co-defendants and also to release the personnel files of the WDFW employees.  A scheduling conference was set for 1/12/17. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Jpmiller on November 23, 2016, 11:52:37 AM
He ever fill the rest of his tags?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on November 23, 2016, 02:44:04 PM
Somebody has to know somebody who knows somebody that knows somebody that's seen a pic of his harvests from this year, come on people...

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: full choke on November 23, 2016, 02:51:05 PM
Is WDFW currently in possession of the antlers?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on November 23, 2016, 03:15:08 PM
Yes
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on November 23, 2016, 03:17:36 PM
Somebody has to know somebody who knows somebody that knows somebody that's seen a pic of his harvests from this year, come on people...

Pennsylvania tag has been filled.  That is according to fellow chuck shooters I correspond with from Pennsylvania.  Sheep tag was filled on Eaton's ranch according to six or eight different people I have spoken to.  IDK anything about the other tags
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lokidog on November 23, 2016, 06:44:40 PM
This guy probably donated to the Clinton Foundation.....   :bash:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JJB11B on January 29, 2017, 05:33:50 PM
This guy probably donated to the Clinton Foundation.....   :bash:
he lost money then, I heard they "Shut down" a huge portion of it....weird
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bobcat on August 08, 2017, 10:56:50 AM
The Commission just recently revised the rules so that Reichert can't kill a bull in GMU 334 this year...


http://wdfw.wa.gov/commission/meetings/2017/08/aug0417_14_summary.pdf
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on August 08, 2017, 10:58:18 AM
So, they are admitting the regs were confusing.........
 ;)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on August 08, 2017, 11:00:26 AM
Got to hold bullwinkles horns a month or so ago, damn nice bull....
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on August 08, 2017, 11:07:39 AM
That didn't clear anything up.  The next loop hole is plain as day with this wording. Technically any unit open for elk hunting is open for bull elk.  Even in an antlerless only unit you could end up shooting a calf bull, so you just legally shot a bull in that unit.  If you could shoot that bull then you could use one of these tags to shoot any other bull.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bobcat on August 08, 2017, 11:12:06 AM
That didn't clear anything up.  The next loop hole is plain as day with this wording. Technically any unit open for elk hunting is open for bull elk.  Even in an antlerless only unit you could end up shooting a calf bull, so you just legally shot a bull in that unit.  If you could shoot that bull then you could use one of these tags to shoot any other bull.

It specifically lists GMU 334 as not being open. Problem solved. It should have always been that way. But I still don't agree with Reichert exploiting that issue, and claiming that it wasn't clear.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bob33 on August 08, 2017, 11:16:27 AM
That didn't clear anything up.  The next loop hole is plain as day with this wording. Technically any unit open for elk hunting is open for bull elk.  Even in an antlerless only unit you could end up shooting a calf bull, so you just legally shot a bull in that unit.  If you could shoot that bull then you could use one of these tags to shoot any other bull.

It specifically lists GMU 334 as not being open. Problem solved. It should have always been that way. But I still don't agree with Reichert exploiting that issue, and claiming that it wasn't clear.
It clears up the GMU 334 confusion but leaves open the possibility of hunting elk in a GMU open to antlerless elk only, because antlerless elk can be bulls.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bobcat on August 08, 2017, 11:18:14 AM
That didn't clear anything up.  The next loop hole is plain as day with this wording. Technically any unit open for elk hunting is open for bull elk.  Even in an antlerless only unit you could end up shooting a calf bull, so you just legally shot a bull in that unit.  If you could shoot that bull then you could use one of these tags to shoot any other bull.

It specifically lists GMU 334 as not being open. Problem solved. It should have always been that way. But I still don't agree with Reichert exploiting that issue, and claiming that it wasn't clear.
It clears up the GMU 334 confusion but leaves open the possibility of hunting elk in a GMU open to antlerless elk only, because antlerless elk can be bulls.

What units are only open to antlerless elk?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bob33 on August 08, 2017, 11:19:30 AM
That didn't clear anything up.  The next loop hole is plain as day with this wording. Technically any unit open for elk hunting is open for bull elk.  Even in an antlerless only unit you could end up shooting a calf bull, so you just legally shot a bull in that unit.  If you could shoot that bull then you could use one of these tags to shoot any other bull.

It specifically lists GMU 334 as not being open. Problem solved. It should have always been that way. But I still don't agree with Reichert exploiting that issue, and claiming that it wasn't clear.
It clears up the GMU 334 confusion but leaves open the possibility of hunting elk in a GMU open to antlerless elk only, because antlerless elk can be bulls.

What units are only open to antlerless elk?
I don't know of any presently but there could be in the future at which time they'd need to rewrite the WAC.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on August 08, 2017, 11:21:25 AM
That didn't clear anything up.  The next loop hole is plain as day with this wording. Technically any unit open for elk hunting is open for bull elk.  Even in an antlerless only unit you could end up shooting a calf bull, so you just legally shot a bull in that unit.  If you could shoot that bull then you could use one of these tags to shoot any other bull.

It specifically lists GMU 334 as not being open. Problem solved. It should have always been that way. But I still don't agree with Reichert exploiting that issue, and claiming that it wasn't clear.
Oh it's perfectly clear to me for 334 but then again it was perfectly clear to me when it obviously wasn't to a hunter that goes after these trophy bulls all the time.  I can just see that there is a way around this new rule maybe not in 334 and maybe not in any units under the current regs.  But if down the line they change another units regs to be similar to 334 they will have to address this issue again.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on August 10, 2017, 12:52:11 PM
That didn't clear anything up.  The next loop hole is plain as day with this wording. Technically any unit open for elk hunting is open for bull elk.  Even in an antlerless only unit you could end up shooting a calf bull, so you just legally shot a bull in that unit.  If you could shoot that bull then you could use one of these tags to shoot any other bull.

It specifically lists GMU 334 as not being open. Problem solved. It should have always been that way. But I still don't agree with Reichert exploiting that issue, and claiming that it wasn't clear.

That "loophole" was located ex post facto by Steven Hormel.  It was not even on the radar of anyone who was claiming that Morgan Grant had granted permiSession to shoot that bull
SimplePortal 2.3.7 © 2008-2024, SimplePortal