Wanna be poachers

[smartazz171]

alright, First What I love is I'm castrated instantly to think a hunter carrying elk calls with a weapon the day before the season starts ISN'T poaching.  to use an analogy that was already used on the post,   NO you shouldn't be presumed to be a robber while carrying a side arm into a store (them with their bow), but You walk in with a ski mask and the side arm,  people are going to start assuming your going to rob them (them with the bugle and the bow). Even though in court you wouldn't be proven guilty unless you did.  But if a cop stopped you on the way in and arrested you, you would have some explaining to do.   I'm so sorry my cameras didn't take the surveillance of them harvesting an animal that would satisfy everyone on here.  Next time I'll try that,   I'm not saying its RIGHT that they WERE HUNTING ELK but it was enough to make a person on a hunter forum with his peers assume they were. and use my free speech to say so.   
Also why not just be cool about it like some of you did and say "actually I don't think it is illegal.  Myself and most the hunters I know call for elk while hunting other things?"  I'm instantly an ANTI!

 so to evolve the debate (which clearly I am out numbered with )  I called the dept of fish and wildlife and talked to a enforcement agent.  TECHNICALLY they were not doing anything illegal if they had a valid tag in their pocket.  BUT He said that it would have to depend on what was said in the interview of the hunters.  If they had a bear tag or deer tag, they would be ok to carry the bows but they would have to articulate "very, very Well why they are carrying those bugles" he said that he only needs the preponderant of evidence (that's 50.1%) to write them a ticket/ arrest them.  NOT innocent until proven guilty.  He said most likely They were hunting probably for ELK and He would/ could have cited them for it if they met them walking out.  He claimed it may not stick in court because thats where the innocence is presumed but walking with a weapon and calls for a season that is so close to opening would likely lead to him citing them.  Most cases without a Killed animal is hard to prove in court. 

He made an analogy that if I was hunting elk with my bow and I had it in my front seat,  but I had a rifle in the back.  I had a bear tag(any weapon) and an archery elk tag,  He couldn't do anything.  But he would warn me I need to decide if I am hunting Bear or elk because If I stepped out of the truck with both I would be nailed. 

Point is,   lay off me.  My assumption of them hunting the day before the season seems to be inline with enforcement. It may be BS which I have no call to be wrong.  But How I learned to hunt with a bow was that I could not do both.   Like I said,  scout  or hunt.

so evolving this debate on the big *** I am for thinking what I did was so wrong.   How about changing the debate to whether this is a stupid thing to enforce?  It seems like everyone else is doing it.  How can they enforce it? Does an animal always need to die before we can question it?

[smartazz171]

stick with what you believe man... everyones entitled to there opinion... you can assume anything an everything you want... dont matter what anyone says....people will say what they want and "torch you" and make you feel like you dont know anything ...but it dont matter ....if you even had a clear picture of Big Foot they would still find away to talk you down.. I dont think you should have apologized... dont worry bout it man

Thanks for not calling me an ANTI, (or a democrat for that matter)

[pianoman9701]

alright, First What I love is I'm castrated instantly to think a hunter carrying elk calls with a weapon the day before the season starts ISN'T poaching.  to use an analogy that was already used on the post,   NO you shouldn't be presumed to be a robber while carrying a side arm into a store (them with their bow), but You walk in with a ski mask and the side arm,  people are going to start assuming your going to rob them (them with the bugle and the bow). Even though in court you wouldn't be proven guilty unless you did.  But if a cop stopped you on the way in and arrested you, you would have some explaining to do.   I'm so sorry my cameras didn't take the surveillance of them harvesting an animal that would satisfy everyone on here.  Next time I'll try that,   I'm not saying its RIGHT that they WERE HUNTING ELK but it was enough to make a person on a hunter forum with his peers assume they were. and use my free speech to say so.   
Also why not just be cool about it like some of you did and say "actually I don't think it is illegal.  Myself and most the hunters I know call for elk while hunting other things?"  I'm instantly an ANTI!

 so to evolve the debate (which clearly I am out numbered with )  I called the dept of fish and wildlife and talked to a enforcement agent.  TECHNICALLY they were not doing anything illegal if they had a valid tag in their pocket.  BUT He said that it would have to depend on what was said in the interview of the hunters.  If they had a bear tag or deer tag, they would be ok to carry the bows but they would have to articulate "very, very Well why they are carrying those bugles" he said that he only needs the preponderant of evidence (that's 50.1%) to write them a ticket/ arrest them.  NOT innocent until proven guilty.  He said most likely They were hunting probably for ELK and He would/ could have cited them for it if they met them walking out.  He claimed it may not stick in court because thats where the innocence is presumed but walking with a weapon and calls for a season that is so close to opening would likely lead to him citing them.  Most cases without a Killed animal is hard to prove in court. 

He made an analogy that if I was hunting elk with my bow and I had it in my front seat,  but I had a rifle in the back.  I had a bear tag(any weapon) and an archery elk tag,  He couldn't do anything.  But he would warn me I need to decide if I am hunting Bear or elk because If I stepped out of the truck with both I would be nailed. 

Point is,   lay off me.  My assumption of them hunting the day before the season seems to be inline with enforcement. It may be BS which I have no call to be wrong.  But How I learned to hunt with a bow was that I could not do both.   Like I said,  scout  or hunt.

so evolving this debate on the big *** I am for thinking what I did was so wrong.   How about changing the debate to whether this is a stupid thing to enforce?  It seems like everyone else is doing it.  How can they enforce it? Does an animal always need to die before we can question it?

Castrated, really? You must have a very small set then. You'll probably want to put on your big boy pants the next time you create a whole story from a picture off one of your cams and post it in here. I suggest a couple small red potatoes stuffed correctly will give a better impression. 

Look, you are jumping to conclusions whether you like it or not, or want to admit it or not. You assume these guys are poaching but you really have no idea. They could be deer hunting and elk scouting, listening for responses. That's precisely why in a court of law they need actual proof, not conjecture about what they might be doing or want to do.

I don't have a problem with someone like you making a mistake. I do have a problem when someone like you can't admit that they've jumped the gun or might be wrong. The truth is you have no idea what those guys were doing unless you see them poach a bull. That's it and there's nothing else. You pulled the plug too soon and don't want to fess up to it. Don't be surprised when people call you out for it. I've done it, too.

[returnofsid]

I've often wondered about the "harassment" wording, in the regulations.  Could calling, out of season, be considered animal harassment?  I've heard, though I know not the accuracy of the statement, that's it's illegal to call turkeys, out of season, and falls under the animal harassment portion of the regs.

[bobcat]

If those guys did not have bear tags and/or archery deer tags, then I would think there's no doubt they'd be in trouble. Although, maybe they were grouse hunting?   

WDFW enforcement officers have a tough job for sure. I'm sure there's a whole lot of rules that are commonly violated, but in most cases nothing will ever come if it, because the would-be poachers are not successful. Or even if they are, what's the likely hood of there actually being a warden in the area to catch them?

[coachcw]

run the numbers bobcat !

[Buckmania]

alright, First What I love is I'm castrated instantly to think a hunter carrying elk calls with a weapon the day before the season starts ISN'T poaching.  to use an analogy that was already used on the post,   NO you shouldn't be presumed to be a robber while carrying a side arm into a store (them with their bow), but You walk in with a ski mask and the side arm,  people are going to start assuming your going to rob them (them with the bugle and the bow). Even though in court you wouldn't be proven guilty unless you did.  But if a cop stopped you on the way in and arrested you, you would have some explaining to do.   I'm so sorry my cameras didn't take the surveillance of them harvesting an animal that would satisfy everyone on here.  Next time I'll try that,   I'm not saying its RIGHT that they WERE HUNTING ELK but it was enough to make a person on a hunter forum with his peers assume they were. and use my free speech to say so.   
Also why not just be cool about it like some of you did and say "actually I don't think it is illegal.  Myself and most the hunters I know call for elk while hunting other things?"  I'm instantly an ANTI!

 so to evolve the debate (which clearly I am out numbered with )  I called the dept of fish and wildlife and talked to a enforcement agent.  TECHNICALLY they were not doing anything illegal if they had a valid tag in their pocket.  BUT He said that it would have to depend on what was said in the interview of the hunters.  If they had a bear tag or deer tag, they would be ok to carry the bows but they would have to articulate "very, very Well why they are carrying those bugles" he said that he only needs the preponderant of evidence (that's 50.1%) to write them a ticket/ arrest them.  NOT innocent until proven guilty.  He said most likely They were hunting probably for ELK and He would/ could have cited them for it if they met them walking out.  He claimed it may not stick in court because thats where the innocence is presumed but walking with a weapon and calls for a season that is so close to opening would likely lead to him citing them.  Most cases without a Killed animal is hard to prove in court. 

He made an analogy that if I was hunting elk with my bow and I had it in my front seat,  but I had a rifle in the back.  I had a bear tag(any weapon) and an archery elk tag,  He couldn't do anything.  But he would warn me I need to decide if I am hunting Bear or elk because If I stepped out of the truck with both I would be nailed. 

Point is,   lay off me.  My assumption of them hunting the day before the season seems to be inline with enforcement. It may be BS which I have no call to be wrong.  But How I learned to hunt with a bow was that I could not do both.   Like I said,  scout  or hunt.

so evolving this debate on the big *** I am for thinking what I did was so wrong.   How about changing the debate to whether this is a stupid thing to enforce?  It seems like everyone else is doing it.  How can they enforce it? Does an animal always need to die before we can question it?

So if someone sees you out in the woods with a rifle when there isn't any season going on, we can safely assume you're out poaching and not target shooting?

You got "castrated instantly" because you plastered someone's face on the internet hoping to see them get lynched based on your own erroneous conclusions. 

And here's another little tip, warden's interpretations of the laws are just that, interpretations (i.e. each one differs and each one sees things differently). In fact the warden you talked to, might cite those guys one day and not the next, given the exact same scenario, including whatever is said. 

[smartazz171]

Let's put it this way,  If I'm wrong, I'll be the first to apologize , but You could also say If they weren't doing anything wrong then I might be saving them or someone else a ticket by bringing the subject up.

I don't have a problem with someone like you making a mistake. I do have a problem when someone like you can't admit that they've jumped the gun or might be wrong. The truth is you have no idea what those guys were doing unless you see them poach a bull. That's it and there's nothing else. You pulled the plug too soon and don't want to fess up to it. Don't be surprised when people call you out for it. I've done it, too.

[whiteeyes]

Trail cams should be outlawed, unless used on private property. Pretty sad you cant go for a walk down the street without being on camera, now its the same way in the hills.

[smartazz171]

If those guys did not have bear tags and/or archery deer tags, then I would think there's no doubt they'd be in trouble. Although, maybe they were grouse hunting?   

WDFW enforcement officers have a tough job for sure. I'm sure there's a whole lot of rules that are commonly violated, but in most cases nothing will ever come if it, because the would-be poachers are not successful. Or even if they are, what's the likely hood of there actually being a warden in the area to catch them?

well said 

[pianoman9701]

Trail cams should be outlawed, unless used on private property. Pretty sad you cant go for a walk down the street without being on camera, now its the same way in the hills.

And away we go!

[returnofsid]

Trail cams should be outlawed, unless used on private property. Pretty sad you cant go for a walk down the street without being on camera, now its the same way in the hills.

I'm a photographer so this idea is somewhat near and dear to my heart.  In the public, including on top of a mountain in a National forest, a person has no, what the law refers to as "reasonable expectation of privacy."  If you want an expectation of privacy, stay in your home and remember to keep your curtains drawn.  If someone is standing on the public sidewalk and photographs you in your home, through your window, the photographer is in the right.  As long as on public property, with very few exceptions (military bases, some airport properties, some bridges) anyone can photograph anything.

[smartazz171]

Buck:   I concede that I was wrong to assume they were attempting to poach based off just the picture:  thus I apologized and removed the photo.  But that doesn't change that I interpreted the law correctly.  I may have jumped the gun on posting the pic but not on the assumption they were prob up to no good.  Maybe, maybe not. I said I could be wrong.  I presented the belief I had and many of you presented yours.  what I can't believe is how many of you act like these guys couldn't have possibly been up to no good. 

your right they prob were picking mushrooms,  although wait I didn't get that on camera...... maybe they were hunting chipmunks?

In law, it is always about interpretations.  so....whats your point?  Every supreme court decision is almost always 5-4 so even the highest court debating our oldest framework doesn't agree.  I interpreted that you cannot be carrying a call for an animal that isn't in season along with a weapon used to kill such animal.  YOU may have not interpreted that the same, and Im sorry but don't act like I'm crazy for being so black and white with it.  I would expect people to think I was hunting elk with that same scenario.  If you are ok with going through the court proceedings to prove you were not,  fine. But I don't think its worth it and i'll call it like I see it.

[blacktail luv]

I would bet the farm those guys would have shot an elk given the chance.  I know quite a few people who believe the night before the season is close enough.   
Stop apologizing smartazz, ill agree with you.

[fastdam]

Trail cams should be outlawed, unless used on private property. Pretty sad you cant go for a walk down the street without being on camera, now its the same way in the hills.

I somewhat agree with you. But I dont see any problem with trailcams if they were clearly marked with a bright colored flag and the owners full name and contact information, as well as the date it was hung and the date its coming down. Kinda like some states manage bear baits.  without that information, everyone of them is litter as far as i'm concerned.