Legal question

[Curly]

For either scenario the proper citation would be for trespassing, in my opinion, even though you may not have actually set foot on the private property. Either that or they could cite you for negligently shooting from the road. Whether it was truly negligent would be up to the judge.

Tresspassing really doesn't fit.  Negligently shooting from the road wouldn't fit either since the fenceline is a good 20 feet from the pavement.  The only one that really seems acceptable in my mind is littering. (The shooter would be littering his bullet and the animal he left there.) Wastage apparently fits but just isn't logical since almost no one eats coyotes..........

I'd be interested to know if the citation style in Adams and grant counties were for instances like this where the shooter was not showing respect toward the landowner?



Sent from my SM-T900 using Tapatalk

If anyone shot something, ANYTHING on my property without permission, they are trespassing and I will put as much anergy/effort as I can in prosecuting them to the fullest extent.  Plus it's just a dumba*** thing to do.     I don't care whether they set a foot on my property or not.

I don't disagree that it is wrong to do, but it sure does not seem like tresspassing would stick.  Littering or like bigtex said wastage.  (Although I do think the wastage laws need changed if you are required to eat or coyote or crow or nutria or whatever. )  Maybe tresspassing laws need changed too, but for now it sure doesn't seem that tresspassing fits.

BTW, I wouldn't blame an officer for writing up a guy for wastage in an instance like this since it is a way of punishing a guy for a dumba*** thing.  But if officers are really writing citations to coyote hunters that are otherwise following rules and ethics, then the wastage laws need to be revised. Until the law is changed I would think that head of wdfw enforcement could ask that his guys not write up crow hunters or coyote hunters. 

[Bob33]

Leaving a dead coyote where it can feed other wildlife is wastage, but taking it home and dumping it in your garbage can isn't.

Wow.

[bigtex]

But if officers are really writing citations to coyote hunters that are otherwise following rules and ethics, then the wastage laws need to be revised. Until the law is changed I would think that head of wdfw enforcement could ask that his guys not write up crow hunters or coyote hunters.

As state laws are written there is no separation between predators and non-predators, or highly sought after fish and those fish that nobody cares about. As an example, a guy who takes 2 times his daily limit of salmon over his daily limit will face the same penalties as the guy who took 2 times of WDFW trout over his daily limit, or 2 times of bass over his daily limit. It's simply an overlimit of fish is an overlimit of fish, or wastage of wildlife is wastage of wildlife doesn't matter what type of animal it is.

[pianoman9701]

For either scenario the proper citation would be for trespassing, in my opinion, even though you may not have actually set foot on the private property. Either that or they could cite you for negligently shooting from the road. Whether it was truly negligent would be up to the judge.

Tresspassing really doesn't fit.  Negligently shooting from the road wouldn't fit either since the fenceline is a good 20 feet from the pavement.  The only one that really seems acceptable in my mind is littering. (The shooter would be littering his bullet and the animal he left there.) Wastage apparently fits but just isn't logical since almost no one eats coyotes..........

I'd be interested to know if the citation style in Adams and grant counties were for instances like this where the shooter was not showing respect toward the landowner?



Sent from my SM-T900 using Tapatalk

If anyone shot something, ANYTHING on my property without permission, they are trespassing and I will put as much anergy/effort as I can in prosecuting them to the fullest extent.  Plus it's just a dumba*** thing to do.     I don't care whether they set a foot on my property or not.

Being that this is the point of the whole thread, absolutely agreed. 

[Curly]

Actually the point of the thread was to find out what part of shooting the yote would be illegal.

Is it legal to shoot a coyote in a farmer's field even if you don't have permission?   I saw a coyote out in a freshly gut grass field yesterday. Thought about turning around and shooting from the county road right-of-way but finally decided it may not be a good idea.

Ethically it may not be good to drop a yote and leave him lay out in a field for the land owner to deal with, but I wonder if any laws would be broken by shooting a coyote in a field where you do not have permission?

I never would have thought that wastage would be what they would pinch a guy with.  Sounds like bigtex doesn't think trespassing would fit.  I think in Montana this with scenario they would be able stick the guy with tresspassing and shooting from a road; I would hope that wastage would not be among the charges there.

[bigtex]

Sounds like bigtex doesn't think trespassing would fit.  I think in Montana this with scenario they would be able stick the guy with tresspassing and shooting from a road; I would hope that wastage would not be among the charges there.

I never said trespassing wouldn't fit, I said it would be an interesting case for the prosecutor to prove. I could somehow see them saying that the bullet entering the property was somehow connected to the individual, and as a result the individual trespassed. Now obviously this trespass case would take a little bit more effort then simply finding someone on another's land. Also need to remember that trespass cases go to the bottom of the pile when it comes to prosecutors and what they deem as important.

[Wazukie]

Shooting the coyote and "leaving it lay" would actually fall under wastage and is a hunting/wildlife offense. As far as trespassing goes, it would definitely be an interesting one for the prosecutor. But certainly a wastage charge would apply, you can't let ANYTHING waste, doesn't matter if it's a buck or a coyote.

Just wondering what the RCW or code that would be violated is?

[bigtex]

Shooting the coyote and "leaving it lay" would actually fall under wastage and is a hunting/wildlife offense. As far as trespassing goes, it would definitely be an interesting one for the prosecutor. But certainly a wastage charge would apply, you can't let ANYTHING waste, doesn't matter if it's a buck or a coyote.

Just wondering what the RCW or code that would be violated is?

Been mentioned before. RCW 77.15.160(2)(c) which is an infraction (fine only, no possible jail time, simply a citation)

[Wazukie]

Thanks BT.  I was looking at .170

But leaving it lay really isn't waste because it feeding the ecosystem  (sarcasm)

[bigtex]

But leaving it lay really isn't waste because it feeding the ecosystem  (sarcasm)

And realistically if we wanted to go with that then we may as well eliminate wastage laws. I mean lets say I don't like deer backstrap, why can't I leave backstraps to waste in the field, I mean some bird, or predator will eat it right? So it's not really going to waste  Or is it simply okay to let predators go to waste in a field, but not the animals we like? And that's why WA law doesn't seperate between wasting species, wasting an animal is wasting an animal. The penalties are different for wasting a deer and a coyote, but it's still illegal to do either.

[Wazukie]

I completely understand, I was just having fun.  Some people actually eat them.  So if I only take the hide, am I still wasting?

[stevemiller]

  I just looked at rcw 77.15.170 and it doesnt seem to make this a wasting offense in any way.Wildlife Needs to be worth $250. or be considered big game. A coyote in neither. 

[Blacktail Sniper]

  I just looked at rcw 77.15.170 and it doesnt seem to make this a wasting offense in any way.Wildlife Needs to be worth $250. or be considered big game. A coyote in neither. 

If you look at RCW 77.15.160 it covers wildlife under $250.00 and is an infraction as bigtex said in one of his earlier posts.

I thought as you did, unless a coyote's...uhmmm...is gold-plated, no way would it even be close to $250.00.


Read down under Hunting Infractions, section 2 c:
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=77.15.160

[bobcat]

Like I said before, if this is true, then coyote hunting is illegal in this state. Because nobody eats them, so if you hunt them you are guilty of wastage.

[stevemiller]

  I just looked at rcw 77.15.170 and it doesnt seem to make this a wasting offense in any way.Wildlife Needs to be worth $250. or be considered big game. A coyote in neither. 

If you look at RCW 77.15.160 it covers wildlife under $250.00 and is an infraction as bigtex said in one of his earlier posts.

I thought as you did, unless a coyote's...uhmmm...is gold-plated, no way would it even be close to $250.00.


Read down under Hunting Infractions, section 2 c:
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=77.15.160

Where do you see anything that states UNDER $250.?