Bill in Olympia to affect shed hunting with dogs?

[jackelope]

I changed the title of the thread. Didn't feel like it accurately reflected the gist of the article. That's what I get for rushing…

[nalley112]

as a land owner just shoot the Damned dogs

you must not own a hunting dog or just a dog in that matter.. most dogs become a part in the family..if you were to shoot at my dog i would shoot back.
its not the dogs fault for running the deer and elk around. its the owners fault for letting them do it and not having them on a leash.

[lokidog]

as a land owner just shoot the Damned dogs

you must not own a hunting dog or just a dog in that matter.. most dogs become a part in the family..if you were to shoot at my dog i would shoot back.
its not the dogs fault for running the deer and elk around. its the owners fault for letting them do it and not having them on a leash.

Yeah, but we, unfortunately, can't shoot loser dog owners....  I didn't read the bill, but what abot if we are out walking our dogs, in control, and find a shed?  Now I'm a wildlife law breaker?  BS!!

[haugenna]

Didn't even make it past the first page lol

[runamuk]

Isn't letting dogs chase elk already illegal?  And trespassing is already illegal? and harassing wildlife?

yes but since when does enforcing an existing law buy votes    it's way funner to make more laws that are even more convoluted and less likely to be enforced than the previous one and if we are super lucky it will contradict some other law thus eventually ending up in some courtroom to be debated and really only providing job security for people paid with taxes, oh that they will need to raise again because they cant afford to enforce them due to budget...wash.... rinse.... repeat

[lokidog]

Isn't letting dogs chase elk already illegal?  And trespassing is already illegal? and harassing wildlife?

yes but since when does enforcing an existing law buy votes    it's way funner to make more laws that are even more convoluted and less likely to be enforced than the previous one and if we are super lucky it will contradict some other law thus eventually ending up in some courtroom to be debated and really only providing job security for people paid with taxes, oh that they will need to raise again because they cant afford to enforce them due to budget...wash.... rinse.... repeat

 

[nalley112]

maybe they should make a season on when you can start using a dog?? but then again who is going to be out and enforce it?
 or like Lokidog said what if your out for a little hike with your dogs and there lies one right in front of you and its not open? who is going to pass it up just cause they have a dog

[Jingles]

as a land owner just shoot the Damned dogs

you must not own a hunting dog or just a dog in that matter.. most dogs become a part in the family..if you were to shoot at my dog i would shoot back.
its not the dogs fault for running the deer and elk around. its the owners fault for letting them do it and not having them on a leash.

Yes I have had hunting dogs and I currently have a dog and I did not let them chase deer it is the owners fault they chase deer/ elk  if the owner doesn't take the time or have the intelligence to train his dogs. And it your dogs are chasing deer on my private property as was described your dogs are gonna get shot at and if you shoot at me get ready for a gunfight

[nalley112]

still not the dogs fault.. shoot at the owner and i would hope he would then figure it out..doesnt matter if its private or not..

[bigtex]

I am sorry this is a HORRIBLE article.

The bill has NOTHING to do with using dogs to find sheds. All the bill does is make it a fish and wildlife offense to be on someone's land without their permission and look for sheds.

[lokidog]

Guess that got twisted in translation.  That bill is still stupid though since there are already trespass laws, so it boils down to the same thing, NO NEW LAWS THAT HAVE NO REAL PURPOSE!!!!

[PolarBear]

as a land owner just shoot the Damned dogs

[Chesapeake]

It seems to me it would be more prevalent to have shed hunters purposefully sending their dogs onto private lands to fetch sheds, than to have them sending their dogs to run the animals. The article doesn't seem to mention this at all. But the bill uses the word "retrieve" a lot. Maybe they are expecting that wording to cover sending your dog to do the "trespassing" and "retrieving" of wildlife parts. I'm sure there is some legal reason they didn't mention "Dog" in there.



 

[Huntmossberg8]

RCW that covers any act of using dogs to harass big game, not to even mention the trespass issue (Criminal Trespass 2nd). If dogs are being trained/used to locate already shed antlers, I fully support that.

RCW 77.15.240
Unlawful use of dogs — Penalty — Authority to take or destroy a dog — Certain hazing activities permitted.
   

(1)(a) A person is guilty of unlawful use of dogs if the person:

     (i) Negligently fails to prevent a dog under the person's control from pursuing, harassing, attacking, or killing deer, elk, moose, caribou, mountain sheep, or animals classified as endangered under this title; or

     (ii) Uses the dog to hunt deer or elk.

     (b) For the purposes of this subsection, a dog is "under a person's control" if the dog is owned or possessed by, or in the custody of, a person.

     (2) Unlawful use of dogs is a misdemeanor.

     (3)(a) Based on a reasonable belief that a dog is pursuing, harassing, attacking, or killing a deer, elk, moose, caribou, mountain sheep, or animals classified as protected or endangered under this title, fish and wildlife officers and ex officio fish and wildlife officers may:

     (i) Lawfully take a dog into custody; or

     (ii) If necessary to avoid repeated harassment, injury, or death of wildlife under this section, destroy the dog.

     (b) Fish and wildlife officers and ex officio fish and wildlife officers who destroy a dog pursuant to this section are immune from civil or criminal liability arising from their actions.

     (4)(a) This section does not apply to a person using a dog to conduct a department-approved and controlled hazing activity, as long as the person prevents or minimizes physical contact between the dog and the wildlife, and the hazing is being done only for the purposes of wildlife control and the prevention of damage to commercial crops.

     (b) For the purposes of this subsection, "hazing" means the act of chasing or herding wildlife in an effort to move them from one location to another.

[Maverick]

You shouldn't. Lose your hunting rights for two years for shed hunting. It doesn't require a hunting license. My issue with this is because not all shed hunters hunt. In fact I know quite a few that don't hunt at all but love to hike for shed antlers.