collapse

Advertisement


Poll

Are you in favor of this bill?

Yes
No

Author Topic: HB 1627 Unlawful Removal of Wildlife Parts from Private Property  (Read 40572 times)

Offline bigtex

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Explorer
  • ******
  • Join Date: Dec 2009
  • Posts: 10277
HB 1627 sponsored by Representative Schmick (R) would expand WA's hunting while trespassing law to include the activity of collecting wildlife parts (such as antlers) from private property. However, under the current law if you are convicted of hunting while trespassing you lose your hunting license for 2 years, under this bill you would NOT lose your license if you are convicted simply for collecting wildlife parts.

http://lawfilesext.leg.wa.gov/biennium/2015-16/Pdf/Bills/House%20Bills/1627.pdf

Offline 3Under

  • Washington For Wildlife
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Hunter
  • ***
  • Join Date: Apr 2011
  • Posts: 118
  • Location: Skagit
Re: HB 1627 Unlawful Removal of Wildlife Parts from Private Property
« Reply #1 on: January 23, 2015, 10:51:33 PM »
If there is no additional penalty, how does this differ from basic trespassing?

Offline bigtex

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Explorer
  • ******
  • Join Date: Dec 2009
  • Posts: 10277
Re: HB 1627 Unlawful Removal of Wildlife Parts from Private Property
« Reply #2 on: January 23, 2015, 10:52:02 PM »
If there is no additional penalty, how does this differ from basic trespassing?
Exactly....

Offline dreamunelk

  • Political & Covid-19 Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jan 2009
  • Posts: 2049
Re: HB 1627 Unlawful Removal of Wildlife Parts from Private Property
« Reply #3 on: January 24, 2015, 07:16:35 AM »
This does not make sense.  Trespassing is trespassing.  To me this just sounds like large landowners pushing for laws that would aid them in charging additional access fees to go antler hunting!

Offline BOWHUNTER45

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Explorer
  • ******
  • Join Date: Nov 2009
  • Posts: 14731
Re: HB 1627 Unlawful Removal of Wildlife Parts from Private Property
« Reply #4 on: January 24, 2015, 07:44:02 AM »
It just keeps going on and on ..wonder who sits there making this stuff up ? Or do you think it is landowners weighing in on the issue ? You know as soon as the state sees opportunity to get money from us they are all over it ..

Offline Elkaholic daWg

  • Political & Covid-19 Topics
  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • Old Salt
  • ******
  • Join Date: Mar 2009
  • Posts: 5956
  • Location: Arlington Wa / Rock n Roll-Kelly Hill
Re: HB 1627 Unlawful Removal of Wildlife Parts from Private Property
« Reply #5 on: January 24, 2015, 08:15:56 AM »
All about extraction of $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Blue Ribbon Coalition
CCRKBA
SAF
NRA                        
Go DaWgs!!

Offline Rainier10

  • Administrator
  • Trade Count: (+5)
  • Explorer
  • *****
  • Join Date: Dec 2010
  • Posts: 14484
  • Location: Over the edge
Re: HB 1627 Unlawful Removal of Wildlife Parts from Private Property
« Reply #6 on: January 24, 2015, 09:16:13 AM »
I had to vote yes on this one.  As a small private land owner and love to hike around my 40 acres with my two young daughters looking for shed antlers and just overall enjoying the property.  They are too small to go for all day hikes with me in the NF so I sometimes plant sheds for them to find on our property.  Sometimes we have actually found naturally shed antlers on our property.

Unfortunately I have had arguments with trespassers that weren't  "really trespassing" they were just on clearly posted private property(every 200 feet) to pick up shed elk antlers.  They were on foot and said "if we would have driven our quad onto the property then we would have been trespassing"  Trespassing is trespassing no matter if you are hunting elk or just shed hunting.  It is dumb that we have to adjust the law to spell it out for some but that is what my experience has been.
Pain is temporary, achieving the goal is worth it.

I didn't say it would be easy, I said it would be worth it.

Every father should remember that one day his children will follow his example instead of his advice.


The views and opinions expressed in this post are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of HuntWa or the site owner.

Offline Jingles

  • WA State Trappers Association
  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • Frontiersman
  • *****
  • Join Date: Mar 2011
  • Posts: 3868
  • Location: Methow Valley 98862
Re: HB 1627 Unlawful Removal of Wildlife Parts from Private Property
« Reply #7 on: January 24, 2015, 09:30:21 AM »
Do we really need more laws that say the same ole thing?
 If you are on private property without the owners permission you are trespassing. End of story...,
 Doesn't make a rats azz what your excuse is..... Shed hunting, retrieving game, enjoying nature, looking for lost dog.... Excuse's are like azzholes everybody has one and they all stink....
HMC/USN/RET
1969 -1990
The comments of this poster do not reflect the opinions of HUNTWA Administrators or Moderators unless they so state.

The duty of a Patriot is to protect his country from it's government

Offline The scout

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (+7)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Oct 2012
  • Posts: 1702
  • Location: belfair
Re: HB 1627 Unlawful Removal of Wildlife Parts from Private Property
« Reply #8 on: January 24, 2015, 09:42:48 AM »
well said jingles :tup:

Offline mfswallace

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Frontiersman
  • *****
  • Join Date: Apr 2012
  • Posts: 2653
  • Location: where I be
Re: HB 1627 Unlawful Removal of Wildlife Parts from Private Property
« Reply #9 on: January 24, 2015, 10:18:08 AM »
I had to vote yes on this one.  As a small private land owner and love to hike around my 40 acres with my two young daughters looking for shed antlers and just overall enjoying the property.  They are too small to go for all day hikes with me in the NF so I sometimes plant sheds for them to find on our property.  Sometimes we have actually found naturally shed antlers on our property.

Unfortunately I have had arguments with trespassers that weren't  "really trespassing" they were just on clearly posted private property(every 200 feet) to pick up shed elk antlers.  They were on foot and said "if we would have driven our quad onto the property then we would have been trespassing"  Trespassing is trespassing no matter if you are hunting elk or just shed hunting.  It is dumb that we have to adjust the law to spell it out for some but that is what my experience has been.

Call Leo's if they need clarification

Offline bigtex

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Explorer
  • ******
  • Join Date: Dec 2009
  • Posts: 10277
Re: HB 1627 Unlawful Removal of Wildlife Parts from Private Property
« Reply #10 on: January 24, 2015, 09:16:06 PM »
About the only thing this differs from a basic trespass charge is that it's a fish and wildlife offense, so if you were convicted it would count as a conviction towards license suspension (2 or 3 convictions depending on the offense in a 10 year period.)

All about extraction of $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Can't pull the money card on this one. You would face the same potential penalties under this offense as you would under a basic trespass charge.
« Last Edit: January 24, 2015, 09:27:48 PM by bigtex »

Offline Jingles

  • WA State Trappers Association
  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • Frontiersman
  • *****
  • Join Date: Mar 2011
  • Posts: 3868
  • Location: Methow Valley 98862
Re: HB 1627 Unlawful Removal of Wildlife Parts from Private Property
« Reply #11 on: January 24, 2015, 09:25:15 PM »
About the only thing this different then a basic trespass charge is that it's a fish and wildlife offense, so if you were convicted it would count as a conviction towards license suspension (2 or 3 convictions depending on the offense in a 10 year period.)

All about extraction of $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Can't pull the money card on this one. You would face the same potential penalties under this offense as you would under a basic trespass charge.

Still the same thing already have a law on the books for trespassing no need to be redundant with another trespassing law.... and as far as a license suspension  do you really think a suspended license is going to stop someone that was breaking the law already?  If you do you are probably one of the folks that believe Illegal immigrants are deserving of Amnesty even though they broke the law to get into the US.......
HMC/USN/RET
1969 -1990
The comments of this poster do not reflect the opinions of HUNTWA Administrators or Moderators unless they so state.

The duty of a Patriot is to protect his country from it's government

Offline Elkaholic daWg

  • Political & Covid-19 Topics
  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • Old Salt
  • ******
  • Join Date: Mar 2009
  • Posts: 5956
  • Location: Arlington Wa / Rock n Roll-Kelly Hill
Re: HB 1627 Unlawful Removal of Wildlife Parts from Private Property
« Reply #12 on: January 25, 2015, 06:07:30 AM »
About the only thing this differs from a basic trespass charge is that it's a fish and wildlife offense, so if you were convicted it would count as a conviction towards license suspension (2 or 3 convictions depending on the offense in a 10 year period.)

All about extraction of $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Can't pull the money card on this one. You would face the same potential penalties under this offense as you would under a basic trespass charge.

 But does it change  which coffer the  $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ goes to, say DWF instead of the county or state??
Blue Ribbon Coalition
CCRKBA
SAF
NRA                        
Go DaWgs!!

Offline Eli346

  • Eli
  • Past Sponsor
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Mar 2009
  • Posts: 2293
  • Location: Shelton
Re: HB 1627 Unlawful Removal of Wildlife Parts from Private Property
« Reply #13 on: January 25, 2015, 08:53:46 AM »
Someone needs to tell the legislators that there's free food, alcohol, and sex in Syria so they'll leave this state and quit trying to steal our money!

Offline bigtex

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Explorer
  • ******
  • Join Date: Dec 2009
  • Posts: 10277
Re: HB 1627 Unlawful Removal of Wildlife Parts from Private Property
« Reply #14 on: January 25, 2015, 09:09:42 AM »
About the only thing this differs from a basic trespass charge is that it's a fish and wildlife offense, so if you were convicted it would count as a conviction towards license suspension (2 or 3 convictions depending on the offense in a 10 year period.)

All about extraction of $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Can't pull the money card on this one. You would face the same potential penalties under this offense as you would under a basic trespass charge.
But does it change  which coffer the  $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ goes to, say DWF instead of the county or state??
Nope...Only time WDFW gets fine money is for court ordered restitution or for mandatory poaching civil fines mainly of big game.

 


* Advertisement

* Recent Topics

SimplePortal 2.3.7 © 2008-2024, SimplePortal