collapse

Advertisement


Author Topic: Pullman wolf shooting update 14 Sep 2015  (Read 8886 times)

Offline bigtex

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Explorer
  • ******
  • Join Date: Dec 2009
  • Posts: 10622
Re: Pullman wolf shooting update 14 Sep 2015
« Reply #15 on: September 15, 2015, 03:58:34 PM »
While many of you may like this prosecution, such deals are being made for what many of you would call "true poachers" it's starting to actually pay to be a poacher in WA...

Offline cougarbart

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Scout
  • ****
  • Join Date: Oct 2012
  • Posts: 360
  • Location: eastern wash
Re: Pullman wolf shooting update 14 Sep 2015
« Reply #16 on: September 15, 2015, 04:05:09 PM »
why would it be seized for forfeiture?  Enforcement officers are to write the citiations and gather evidence! Let the prosecutors and the court systems decide the penalty that's their jobs!

Offline Blacktail Sniper

  • Trade Count: (+6)
  • Old Salt
  • ******
  • Join Date: Oct 2009
  • Posts: 5905
  • Location: Rochester, Washington
  • Kill'em all...let the gravy sort'em out!!!
  • Groups: blacktail sniper
Re: Pullman wolf shooting update 14 Sep 2015
« Reply #17 on: September 15, 2015, 04:07:52 PM »
This is how they are doing it:

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=77.15.070

I think the key point is they didn't merely suspect he shot it, and therefore took it as evidence related to a crime, he admitted shooting it, so they seized it instead.

Read about middle way through paragraph 1...
It is better to be consistently incorrect than inconsistently correct...

Sarcasm: The ability to insult stupid people without them realizing it. 

My level of sarcasm depends on your level of stupidity...

Sarcasm makes smart people laugh and stupid people mad.

Offline bigtex

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Explorer
  • ******
  • Join Date: Dec 2009
  • Posts: 10622
Re: Pullman wolf shooting update 14 Sep 2015
« Reply #18 on: September 15, 2015, 04:08:09 PM »
why would it be seized for forfeiture?  Enforcement officers are to write the citiations and gather evidence! Let the prosecutors and the court systems decide the penalty that's their jobs!
In fish and wildlife cases firearms, vehicles, boats, etc are seized for forfeiture. The forfeiture is a civil process separate from the criminal prosecution.

Offline cougarbart

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Scout
  • ****
  • Join Date: Oct 2012
  • Posts: 360
  • Location: eastern wash
Re: Pullman wolf shooting update 14 Sep 2015
« Reply #19 on: September 15, 2015, 04:12:04 PM »
that seems so wrong! I understand if your convicted then you forfit any tool used in the activity! maybe if they had to get a conviction to keep guns and vehicles they would be more likely to not make deals! didn't mean to sound like a jerk, just don't like people who have a job and still want to tell others how they should do theirs!

Offline Miles

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Frontiersman
  • *****
  • Join Date: Apr 2007
  • Posts: 3533
  • Location: Pensacola, Florida
Re: Pullman wolf shooting update 14 Sep 2015
« Reply #20 on: September 15, 2015, 04:16:26 PM »
While many of you may like this prosecution, such deals are being made for what many of you would call "true poachers" it's starting to actually pay to be a poacher in WA...

Any examples?

Offline bigtex

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Explorer
  • ******
  • Join Date: Dec 2009
  • Posts: 10622
Re: Pullman wolf shooting update 14 Sep 2015
« Reply #21 on: September 15, 2015, 04:25:07 PM »
While many of you may like this prosecution, such deals are being made for what many of you would call "true poachers" it's starting to actually pay to be a poacher in WA...
Any examples?
I've written a lot about the change in the Supreme Court rule in WA regarding natural resource offenses. Let's say in 2011 someone shot a non-trophy deer out of season, a WDFW Officer could write the individual a $2,540 criminal citation for take out of season. The $2,000 is a civil fine paid to WDFW, the $540 is a criminal fine paid to the county. If the person pleas guilty/pays the citation they now have a gross misdemeanor conviction on their record.

Starting in 2012 the offender faces a mandatory court appearance, some counties have established guidelines for their prosecutors to use in offenses.

In Kittitas County someone in this case (deer out of season) the standard penalty is 12 months probation, $300 for probation monitoring, and the mandatory civil fine paid to WDFW for big game poaching which in the case of a non-trophy deer is $2,000. If all of that is met then the county will dismiss the case and the person will plea guilty to an infraction (similar to a barbed hook ticket). So no criminal conviction, less money paid out overall, no criminal fine....

Offline Special T

  • Truth the new Hate Speech.
  • Business Sponsor
  • Trade Count: (+13)
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Aug 2009
  • Posts: 25030
  • Location: Skagit Valley
  • Make it Rain!
    • Silver Arrow Bowmen
    • Silver Arrow Bowmen
Re: Pullman wolf shooting update 14 Sep 2015
« Reply #22 on: September 15, 2015, 08:16:13 PM »
While many of you may like this prosecution, such deals are being made for what many of you would call "true poachers" it's starting to actually pay to be a poacher in WA...

Your a true asset to our discussions because you call it straight.

If "True Poachers" are getting this kind of treatment then I think this guys is getting robbed. When sportmen get screwed by the system its hard for us to shed a tear when it allows a "Non True Poacher"  an easy out. Its not sportsmen are getting a fair shake with the department on the wolf issue... I guess there is a little comfort knowing that IF a wolf "Poacher" in the eastern half is caught he will get favoriable treatment like the bunny huggers do on the wetside do.
In archery we have something like the way of the superior man. When the archer misses the center of the target, he turns round and seeks for the cause of his failure in himself. 

Confucius

Offline cougarbart

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Scout
  • ****
  • Join Date: Oct 2012
  • Posts: 360
  • Location: eastern wash
Re: Pullman wolf shooting update 14 Sep 2015
« Reply #23 on: September 16, 2015, 08:34:28 AM »
so the county gets 260 dollars less of the money and doesn't have to spend all the time and money to court personel (prosecutor, judge, filing etc) to get a conviction? WDFW still gets their 2 grand? so what is the issue? it sounds to me like the county made a decision how to budget their tax payers money on a ticket that the state is telling them to enforce!  I bet the county would spend thousands of dollars to get a conviction and they receive 540 dollars! That sounds like bad business!

Offline bigtex

  • Non-Hunting Topics
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Explorer
  • ******
  • Join Date: Dec 2009
  • Posts: 10622
Re: Pullman wolf shooting update 14 Sep 2015
« Reply #24 on: September 16, 2015, 08:46:00 AM »
so the county gets 260 dollars less of the money and doesn't have to spend all the time and money to court personel (prosecutor, judge, filing etc) to get a conviction? WDFW still gets their 2 grand? so what is the issue? it sounds to me like the county made a decision how to budget their tax payers money on a ticket that the state is telling them to enforce!  I bet the county would spend thousands of dollars to get a conviction and they receive 540 dollars! That sounds like bad business!
How about no criminal conviction.... So now in two years if a guy gets busted again there is no criminal conviction on their record, where as prior to 2012 there would be. We now have a ton of fish and wildlife violators out there who were charged, paid a fine to essentially make the charge disappear and don't have a criminal conviction. So in reality there are guys who should have fish and wildlife violation conviction records, but because of our current system they don't have a conviction.

Offline cougarbart

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Scout
  • ****
  • Join Date: Oct 2012
  • Posts: 360
  • Location: eastern wash
Re: Pullman wolf shooting update 14 Sep 2015
« Reply #25 on: September 16, 2015, 12:22:45 PM »
well then if theres such a outrage about that then the public will put pressure on the ones they vote in to court positions!  Enforcement has no need to take a no conviction personally, it doesn't change what their job description is. I understand when enforcement has to deal with same individuals over again its frustrating but that's a personal feeling! Many laws in the RCW or WAC that wdfw has to enforcement may not be the views of an enforcement officer but they cannot make a decision on personal feelings and need to enforce the law.  So in the same view do their job and not worry about what the courts do! I just believe a lot of what is wrong in society today is everyone wants a say into everything that is going on! Just like the public thinking enforcement needs to do this and do that, well its administrations job to make sure whats getting done is correct and not what joe blow thinks needs done! im a Bill Belichick fan, 'Do Your Job" and things will work out!lol

 


* Advertisement

* Recent Topics

Desert Sheds by Dan-o
[Today at 09:54:46 PM]


Search underway for three missing people after boat sinks near Mukilteo by Stein
[Today at 09:30:24 PM]


Anybody breeding meat rabbit? by jackelope
[Today at 09:22:04 PM]


Sportsman’s Muzzloader Selection by VickGar
[Today at 09:20:43 PM]


Vantage Bridge by jackelope
[Today at 08:03:05 PM]


wyoming pronghorn draw by 87Ford
[Today at 07:35:40 PM]


Nevada Results by andrew_in_idaho
[Today at 05:13:20 PM]


Wyoming elk who's in? by go4steelhd
[Today at 03:25:16 PM]


New to ML-Optics help by Threewolves
[Today at 02:55:25 PM]


Survey in ? by metlhead
[Today at 01:42:41 PM]


F250 or Silverado 2500? by 7mmfan
[Today at 01:39:14 PM]


Is FS70 open? by yajsab
[Today at 10:13:07 AM]

SimplePortal 2.3.7 © 2008-2025, SimplePortal