WDFW LE Great Resource for HuntWA - Please Be Respectful

[Rainier10]

on the flashlight stuff     

I would hope if a LEO for wdfw wrote a ticket to a guy who was hunting and used a flashlight to get out at night that LEO would be fired immediately.

This kind of stupid bs is just another reason to NEVER, EVER under any circumstance give any info to a warden other than what you are legally required to...a license, any game etc.  He asks when, where, how...tell him NOTHING! You do not have to answer any questions.  Bigtex asks me how the hunting is/was etc...I will be happy to hand him a phone number to speak with my lawyer. 

The thing is the guy didn't get a ticket, he was informed that he could get a ticket for what he did and that the officer would be watching him.  Something tells me there was more to the story or something that raised this officers suspicion and rather than just act and give the guy a ticket he let him know that he was being watched.

If you can assume he did nothing to warrant the warning based off of the hunters testimony one could also assume that the officer saw something fishy.  Maybe the hunter did shine his light around to see if the buck was still there before leaving the stand, maybe he was hoping the deer would come close enough for a shot just after legal shooting hours.  It happens.  I am not saying this hunter did anything wrong, just maybe it was getting iffy on what he was doing and he got a warning.  No harm no foul, sometimes a reminder of where the line is is helpful.

So the hunter got a warning for watching wildlife after legal hunting hours, he didn't get a ticket.

[smalldog]

I am the one who wrote about using a flash light coming out to my truck.  I would like to know what the game department feels about what I am going to say.   I have killed a lot of bucks in legal hours before dark with a bow.   I have most of the time have had to go back to camp to get my brother and eat dinner and go back out to find the animal with a light.    I always give a good deal of time for the animal to die without pushing it.    We take our packs and knifes so we can bone the animal out.   Where I set my tree stands are usually in places in where most people won't care to hunt, and is where the bigger bucks usually are.   I take a camera and my bow so I can get my pictures before we bone the animal out.     The way I am understanding this   I am breaking the law?    I have been hunting this way most of my life, I am 65 yrs old and have never thought I was breaking the law.

The game warden that I met this year in 101 in a young man, he is a very nice guy and I have an enjoyable time talking to this gent.

[idahohuntr]

smalldog- what you described in your post on page 9 about hiking back to your truck after legal shooting hours...millions of hunters use flashlights every year to return to camp (or their vehicle) safely.  For anyone to even remotely suggest that by having a weapon and a flashlight as you return from a legal hunt that you are breaking a law is ridiculous.  I don't give a ____ what any administrative code or law or statute says...You get a ticket for walking back to your truck holding a weapon and a flashlight...there better be a whole lot more evidence/story before any judge, prosecutor whatever is going to even consider hearing such a matter.  So...while a warden may feel they can write you a ticket on a technical interpretation of the law...I would tell them technically, they can kiss my @$$ because there is no way in hell you or I would ever have to pay that ticket! 

[KFhunter]

In this scenario where you have a buck down and go back after dark to locate it I'd leave the bow in the truck and pack a sidearm for personal protection  (might have a bear/wolf on the carcass) My reason is I plan to pack that sucker back to the truck and don't need to pack a bow too.  I'd probably have a cart or pack frame with me.

The only problem with that is if you find the buck severely wounded and tangled up in the bushes you won't be able to dispatch it. 

1) it's after shooting hours
2) can't dispatch wounded game with a sidearm
3) using the aid of artificial light

Even using a bow would be illegal.
Technically you have to call WDFW and get permission to dispatch a wounded animal after hours,  would they let you use a sidearm if you explained the situation?

Or would they make you pack in the bow, or would an officer accompany you in the field to do it?

[stevemiller]

I'm sorry I have to bigtex.Why does it always have to be the color of the law against the hunter,but rarely against the anti hunter? 

[bigtex]

I'm sorry I have to bigtex.Why does it always have to be the color of the law against the hunter,but rarely against the anti hunter? 

Well when would a hunting law apply against a anti-hunter? Or are you talking just laws in general?

[stevemiller]

Well your talking about the color of the law and all so,I want to know why something as ridiculous as using a light to find your way out of the woods in your op, stands up in court all the time but I'm not seeing much done as far as anti hunters disturbing big game, and harassing hunters.The law.....  Thats all,we have all read about the antis harrassing bird hunters,and antis disturbing wildlife with theyre atvs,and shooting in the air several times to get the game spooked.And the leo come back and say they have the right to shoot firearms just like us,and they can go to these release sites just like us and so on,Not just on this forum have we read this stuff but other places as well.So why doesnt the COLOR OF THE LAW apply to them as well?

[smalldog]

Usually if we pack a deer its been boned out.  While I bone out the deer my brother packs some of the meat as I work on the deer and sometimes we have his son hunting with use and he packs also. We have a really good system and it works well. Most bow hunters that I know have always taken their bow with them when retrieving their game for pictures.  I do see what you are saying about having to finish off an animal that is not dead. I have hunted this way for so long even when I had horses for years and packed in to hunt Elk and Mule deer.  I have always given another sportsman the benefit of doubt.  It would be interesting to hear from other bow hunters on this mater. 
What I think I will do for now on is take my camera with me and a miniature tripod and if I have time before leaving the area take my pics and then go back to camp in the evening hunt and leave my weapon in camp. It does make sense!

[bigtex]

So why doesnt the COLOR OF THE LAW apply to them as well?

It applies to everybody Steve. This isn't a hunter vs anti hunter thing. Yes it is hard to prove hunter harassment and unfortunately that is nationwide. But you can look at all types of laws and find similar situations.

If an officer wanted to he could cite everybody going 1 MPH over the speed limit because that is the law. Technically they can, it's not good discretion and is definitely going to cause some complaints but everybody going 26 in a 25 is breaking the law.

There are all types of laws where it is the true meaning/intent of the law vs the actual written words.

[stevemiller]

So why doesnt the COLOR OF THE LAW apply to them as well?

It applies to everybody Steve. This isn't a hunter vs anti hunter thing. Yes it is hard to prove hunter harassment and unfortunately that is nationwide. But you can look at all types of laws and find similar situations.

If an officer wanted to he could cite everybody going 1 MPH over the speed limit because that is the law. Technically they can, it's not good discretion and is definitely going to cause some complaints but everybody going 26 in a 25 is breaking the law.

There are all types of laws where it is the true meaning/intent of the law vs the actual written words.

I know its the color of the law thing,Your saying its easier to prove because how the law is written with the flashlight,I feel the harrassing hunters law is written in the exact same way.No exceptions given in Wa. law.And its also like you said here.IF AN OFFICER WANTED TO..and thats exactly what I meant by why are they not applied?I did not get an answer....How do you(personally) feel about people harrassing hunters?Do you personally think that it should be something that the LEO should be more active about?And how do LEO that you know personally feel,or how do they deal with this problem?

[bigtex]

So why doesnt the COLOR OF THE LAW apply to them as well?

It applies to everybody Steve. This isn't a hunter vs anti hunter thing. Yes it is hard to prove hunter harassment and unfortunately that is nationwide. But you can look at all types of laws and find similar situations.

If an officer wanted to he could cite everybody going 1 MPH over the speed limit because that is the law. Technically they can, it's not good discretion and is definitely going to cause some complaints but everybody going 26 in a 25 is breaking the law.

There are all types of laws where it is the true meaning/intent of the law vs the actual written words.

I know its the color of the law thing,Your saying its easier to prove because how the law is written with the flashlight,I feel the harrassing hunters law is written in the exact same way.No exceptions given in Wa. law.And its also like you said here.IF AN OFFICER WANTED TO..and thats exactly what I meant by why are they not applied?I did not get an answer....How do you(personally) feel about people harrassing hunters?Do you personally think that it should be something that the LEO should be more active about?And how do LEO that you know personally feel,or how do they deal with this problem?

Actually the hunting harassment law when it comes to harasses/drives or disturbs wildlife can easily be won by a defense attorney.
RCW 77.15.210
(1) A person is guilty of obstructing the taking of fish[, shellfish,] or wildlife if the person:
(a) Harasses, drives, or disturbs fish, shellfish, or wildlife with the intent of disrupting lawful pursuit or taking thereof; or

A hunter may think that the anti-hunter showed up and honked his horn and the geese flew away because of the horn but how can an officer prove that? How can an officer prove that the geese flew away because the horn was honked?

All a defense attorney will say is, well geese are birds and they fly all day long, how can you prove that the geese flew away simply because the horn honk? Problem is we can’t, we don't know if the geese flew away because the horn honked or just because they wanted to leave. And this is where it can be difficult to prove.

WDFW Officers obviously don't want to have hunters being harassed but there is a difference between the situation I posted about an officer asking the hunter how the hunting is and hunter harassment. If an officer asks the individual “how is the hunting?” and the hunter says good (or whatever) and he has a weapon and a light then that’s pretty concrete evidence and it’s going to be hard for the defense attorney to say the defendant wasn’t hunting when the conversation with the officer says otherwise. Compared to the harassment, officers have to really prove somehow that the wildlife was disturbed or harassed, simply having the bird fly away may be good for hunters to think it’s harassment but like I said, birds fly away all day long, and an average defense attorney will easily say that and most likely win. If an officer wanted to charge someone because they honked a horn and the bird flew away they could, but it will easily be won by the defense attorney, if the prosecutor even files the charges.

[stevemiller]

If a person is walking in the woods at night odds are they will be using a light as well.How can you say all of this?heres an example I have been holding onto since this conversation started.A hunter is in the woods,before day break,no light whats so ever.You walk up to them and say what are you doing?the hunter replies Im going hunting.would you then site them because they are hunting before hunting hrs.?Its the color of the law. 

[bigtex]

If a person is walking in the woods at night odds are they will be using a light as well.How can you say all of this?heres an example I have been holding onto since this conversation started.A hunter is in the woods,before day break,no light whats so ever.You walk up to them and say what are you doing?the hunter replies Im going hunting.would you then site them because they are hunting before hunting hrs.?Its the color of the law. 

Unfortunately it is the world we live in and it's nationwide with all types of laws not just fish and wildlife.

But if it's 6:30AM and shooting hours are at 6:50 and an officer asks the individual "how is hunting?" and the individual says something that would indicate that he is indeed hunting then the officer could go along with charging him. I am not saying an officer would, or they should, but evidence is there because he did say in the affirmative that he is hunting.

I think in your situation Steve if the individual said they were "going hunting" instead of simply "hunting" then the officer would face an uphill battle in the courtroom.

[stevemiller]

OK Thanks

[smalldog]

It sounds like to me that the game wardens are trained to ask a certain way to trick someone to answer the way they want them to answer. Kind of like a lawyer with trick questions. If a  guy is camped in the woods with tent or RV and was going into the woods a half hour before dark and the game warden asked how is the hunting, that don't mean he is breaking the law. The hunting might be good in that unit and that might be what he means. You play trick questions and a person answers and you have play of words and he is guilty. That is BS and you know that. If a person is camped by a lake and is hunting and the warden asked how is the fishing in that lake, he might say its pretty good. That does not mean he is fishing, he might have meant that its good lake to fish when its open.  You guys are not giving the sportsman the benefit of the doubt.  Its no wonder that some people feel the way they do about game wardens.   I know because I have had that game played on me.