Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle

[kiticaashunter]

I think it's somewhat legitimate to call this elk a pet and to have a problem with the taking of this elk because of how tame it was. The reason it was this way is because it never lived in a GMU that was open to branch antler elk hunting. This was the only reason this bull survived to the age that he did. Nobody else killed him because it had always been illegal to do so. Until Tod Reichert came along.

one of the bulls that hung out with bullwinkle was tranquilized this winter and was relocate to Joe watt feed lot. When the bull came to it walked out of the trailer looked at all the elk ran all the way to east side before breaking through the fence. He found his way home within less than a week. Hmmm tame? 

Actually that's not the true story.  That poor bull had a tough ending. He ended up getting drug by his horns in yet another mistake by our game department and died. He had a less dignified death than the one you guys killed in the yard last season. Both cases were pretty sad.

[kiticaashunter]

He is one of the most generous good people alive. And has done more for the elk than 95% of the hunters in this state combined.

 What more has he done than the bidder $1000 behind his bid wouldn't have done?

Well if you paid any attention,  I believe it was last year he bid up his own bI'd by another 5k when it was clear there was not another bid coming in.

[PlateauNDN]

Wdfw could've saved time, money and resources and just called me and I would've came out and dropped those bulls for free.

[huntnphool]

He is one of the most generous good people alive. And has done more for the elk than 95% of the hunters in this state combined.

 What more has he done than the bidder $1000 behind his bid wouldn't have done?

Well if you paid any attention,  I believe it was last year he bid up his own bI'd by another 5k when it was clear there was not another bid coming in.

 Wow, I stand corrected, his $5k is indeed more for elk than 95% of the rest of the hunters in this state have done combined.  

[kiticaashunter]

Wdfw could've saved time, money and resources and just called me and I would've came out and dropped those bulls for free.

Not funny. Sure you have gotten more than your fair share.

[winshooter88]

kiticaashunter,

What you said the question was only means that the game enforcement officer said that in a firearms restricted unit even a disabled hunter could not use a rifle and would have to use a muzzleloader, since we don't know which unit he was told it was in, that does nothing to prove that he knew what unit the elk was located in. Also I was always told that ignorance of the law was no excuse.

Partial quote from kitticaashunter's previous post.
"The true fact is at the time the only question in anobodys  mind  was could a rifle be used, or did it need to be a muzzleloader. So they did what we were tought 30 years ago in the fire arms safety course and called and asked the question. Mr. Grant said that it could not be killed with a rifle in that unit. Then was asked if it could because the hunter was disabled.  He said he would figure it out. 16 minutes later (documented) he called back and told them they shouldn't use a rifle and muzzleloader was fine. That shows Grant knew the exact unit this was in."

[/quote]

[jmscon]

Depending on the date when this "hunt" occurred, there is a antlerless hunt in that unit mid November until mid December. You could the WDFW office and say: I'm elk hunting and I'm not sure if I can hunt with a mod rifle or not, can you help me out? Response: Where are you? I'll check and call you back. Ring: You can hunt there but it's a firearms restricted area, so shotgun, muzzle loader or bow. Response: Thanks!

Thing is the other elk that was shot in a "yard" was legal. This elk was not, ever! Oh yea, it was shot in a yard too!

[kiticaashunter]

He is one of the most generous good people alive. And has done more for the elk than 95% of the hunters in this state combined.

 What more has he done than the bidder $1000 behind his bid wouldn't have done?

Well if you paid any attention,  I believe it was last year he bid up his own bI'd by another 5k when it was clear there was not another bid coming in.

 Wow, I stand corrected, his $5k is indeed more for elk than 95% of the rest of the hunters in this state have done combined.  

Guess the moron sign was pointed to me. That's fine All I was trying to do here is tell the honest side of the story of a good man that has put hundreds of thousands of dollars into it in the last few years.

The situation last season was unfortunate.  The honest truth is nobody involved in the situation tried to get around anything or cheat any rules. They checked,  and Grant double checked to make sure it was all on the up and up.

[kiticaashunter]

kiticaashunter,

What you said the question was only means that the game enforcement officer said that in a firearms restricted unit even a disabled hunter could not use a rifle and would have to use a muzzleloader, since we don't know which unit he was told it was in, that does nothing to prove that he knew what unit the elk was located in. Also I was always told that ignorance of the law was no excuse.

Partial quote from kitticaashunter's previous post.
"The true fact is at the time the only question in anobodys  mind  was could a rifle be used, or did it need to be a muzzleloader. So they did what we were tought 30 years ago in the fire arms safety course and called and asked the question. Mr. Grant said that it could not be killed with a rifle in that unit. Then was asked if it could because the hunter was disabled.  He said he would figure it out. 16 minutes later (documented) he called back and told them they shouldn't use a rifle and muzzleloader was fine. That shows Grant knew the exact unit this was in."

[/quote]

Sorry if I wasn't clear on that. Unit next door would have been fine with any weapon. Mr. Grant knew exactly what unit and in fact what peice of property that bull was on when he told them they couldn't use the rifle and needed to use a muzzleloader.

I know you didn't say this but there has been a lot of mention of why the bull was moved to be field dressed. It wasn't some big cover up. The land owner requested a gut pile was not left there. Personally I would think that would be a big part of the story. Last I heard nobody even the people with the newspaper articles ever asked the land owner if that was the case. Instead they print on the words of people that live on the other side of the state, and a couple anti hunters.

[kiticaashunter]

Depending on the date when this "hunt" occurred, there is a antlerless hunt in that unit mid November until mid December. You could the WDFW office and say: I'm elk hunting and I'm not sure if I can hunt with a mod rifle or not, can you help me out? Response: Where are you? I'll check and call you back. Ring: You can hunt there but it's a firearms restricted area, so shotgun, muzzle loader or bow. Response: Thanks!

Thing is the other elk that was shot in a "yard" was legal. This elk was not, ever! Oh yea, it was shot in a yard too!

Mr. Grant knew the exact bull that was was going to be taken. There was no trickery or word's twisted  in this case. At the time he gave gave the good to go he was up for promotion. Since then he has gotten it and tried hard to distance himself from this. He is an honest guy and will tell the truth on the stand. And that will be that he double checked to make sure it was all good.

[ridgefire]

How and why can you try to justify the taking of this elk when it was obviously taken in a closed unit Mr kiticaashunter? Just curious, but since you seem to know all the facts about the hunt what unit was the bull shot in and was it open to any bull with that tag?

[bearpaw]

Depending on the date when this "hunt" occurred, there is a antlerless hunt in that unit mid November until mid December. You could the WDFW office and say: I'm elk hunting and I'm not sure if I can hunt with a mod rifle or not, can you help me out? Response: Where are you? I'll check and call you back. Ring: You can hunt there but it's a firearms restricted area, so shotgun, muzzle loader or bow. Response: Thanks!

Thing is the other elk that was shot in a "yard" was legal. This elk was not, ever! Oh yea, it was shot in a yard too!

Mr. Grant knew the exact bull that was was going to be taken. There was no trickery or word's twisted  in this case. At the time he gave gave the good to go he was up for promotion. Since then he has gotten it and tried hard to distance himself from this. He is an honest guy and will tell the truth on the stand. And that will be that he double checked to make sure it was all good.

Thank you for your many responses, it good to hear the other side of the story. I understand that many hunters would not want to hunt this animal because they view it as not being a challenging hunt and many view it as unethical to shoot an animal that thinks it's safe in an alfalfa field where it never gets shot at. In reality this animal had probably been legal game in this unit at a previous time in it's life. No doubt since maturing into an outstanding animal there have been dozens if not hundreds of hunters who tried to figure out how they could hunt this animal. In the meantime the animal became more complacent as it was not hunted and was even fed by local residents. It appears many local people adopted the bull as their mascot so to speak.

While many hunters condemn Reichert for shooting this animal it sounds like Reichert did the right thing and asked WDFW how to legally hunt the animal. I have pointed out that if a person calls WDFW with a question and is told you can hunt that seems to me all that is needed. I don't see how Reichert can be found guilty if he was told by WDFW after they researched the issue, that he can shoot the animal with his muzzleloader instead of his rifle and that is what he did.

I feel a person is innocent until proven guilty, I find it unfortunate that hunters are so quick to throw other hunters under the bus before they know the facts. I find it unfortunate that hunters turn on each other because they think one way of hunting is more ethical than another. I also find it unfortunate that a hunter needs a crystal ball to know if what they were told they could do by the enforcing agency will result in such a public outcry.

I'm sure someone will try to chastise me because I didn't publicly join in this witch hunt and I'll probably be accused of being an unethical hunter because I don't join in the outcry because this "mascot" was shot in a farmer's field. But I view it in a neutral "black and white" manner, did the hunter break the law or didn't he break the law. After finally hearing the other side of the story I'm not convinced Reichert broke the law. It sounds like he wanted to find a way to legally take the animal and was told by WDFW how to take the animal and then he proceeded. Sorry, but I question if there was any intent to break the law after hearing the other side of the story.

This whole thing more or less reminds me of "Cecil the Lion", the media will blow this story out of proportion to make hunters look bad because the animal was given a human name and considered by locals to be a pet! Unfortunately hunters are helping this scenario to happen! Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying the locals are at fault or that it was smart to shoot this animal. But if you take the emotion out of this story and simply ask yourself two questions, "Was the hunter told by the regulating agency he can shoot the animal?" and "Did the hunter intend to break the law?" While I understand ignorance of the law is no defense I think it's very questionable if Reichert can be found guilty. I would like to hear what Popeshawnpaul thinks after reading all of this?

[JDHasty]

If the only valid elk tag you were holding clearly sets these parameters:

Elk: Any 300 or 500 series GMU open to elk hunting except GMUs not open to branch antlered bull elk hunting

What were you doing hunting elk in GMU 334 in the first place?  Is there anything anywhere in the Game Regs that even suggest that GMU 334 is open to branch antlered elk hunting.


     

[NOCK NOCK]

These most recent posts,(esp. by kiticaashunter) remind me of the Bill Clinton/Monica deal. 

Bills statement, "I did not have sexual relations with that women",
 
Technically he was truthful & correct...He absolutely did not............She had sexual relations with him.

I view kiti's postings here as a poor attempt of muddying the waters. 

[bearpaw]

I'm not going to comment on the legalities of it because I was not there nor the one that got supposed permission to hunt that area.

I do have a problem though with the part about how it's bad to shoot an animal in a field. Zero difference then shooting a cat out of a tree. Neither one takes any skill yet 99% of the people on this site would jump at the chance to shoot a lion in a tree. The first thread on this issue was started because guys were saying it wasn't much of a hunt. Not that it was illegal. Then that started after a page or two.

So for the guys that are saying it's not hunting get off your high horse.

You do a lot of hound hunting Brandon??

oooo you beat me to it!

he likely has never cougar hunted....

I've been lucky enough to do many different hunts, including hunts in several other countries, cougar hunting is still my favorite hunt. Some of the best cougar hunts have ended by taking photos and leaving the cat in the tree! The most rewarding part is watching the young hounds learn and develop into experienced lion hounds. Almost anyone can become successful in many types of hunting, but to be a top notch hound hunter requires incredible dedication by the hunter and a very sharp learning curve. After all the time and work to get good at hound hunting, you can take your dogs to field, search for days and sometimes weeks to find a good track, you and your dogs can experience the thrill of the hunt, hopefully you catch the cat and get photos of the hunted, and then you leave the hunted animal unharmed in the wild after experiencing the hunt of lifetime. Hunting really can't get any better than that!

For those that choose to notch a cougar tag you then have some of the best meat in the woods!

I've actually shot 4 lions in Washington. All without hounds. So yes I've hunted cats before.

Let's say I was rich like some hunters are and a cat is on my bucket list. I hire the best outfitter I can find. Wait by the phone for a call once they get good snow in the area I'm hunting.

Fly in, ride out with an outfitter and cut tracks right away. Get lucky and the cat is treed after a few minutes cause it had a kill next to the road. Hike the 200 yards off the road and shoot it out of the tree. Get my trophy pictures of me with my cat.

Yes not all cat hunts are like that. But some are that easy. And some are way more physical. But at the end of the day most of the cats that get killed take absolutely zero skill from the guys doing the shooting. They pay money to a guy that trains dogs to tree animals. They follow the dogs and shoot an animal out of a tree. Absolutely zero skill on the shooters part. So you have a very good dog trainer, and a guy that pays money to shoot an animal out of a tree, and the actually hunters are the dogs.

How about a guided whitetail hunt with bait? You pay the money, ride out to the blind on the ATV. Wait for the feeder to kick on. Once it does here come the deer and bam you just killed a trophy whitetail. Again zero skill involved. Zero effort involved.

I was more or less correct, you have never cougar hunted with hounds. Instead you have conjured up "how you think it's unethical" in your mind.

Hooray, you are a stud hunter, you killed 4 lions without hounds, that must make everyone who wants to hunt with hounds unethical! I bet you even donated to HSUS so they could ban bear baiting and hound hunting.

FYI, you are nobody special, I know lots of hunters who have killed cougar without dogs, hundreds are killed every year in WA without dogs, all you have to do is follow the tracks until you see the cat and shoot it, anyone can do that, it's the easy way out, you didn't go to all the effort training hounds and doing it right. You simply walked out in the woods and shot those cats, pathetic to say the least. maybe you were even just road hunting and blasted one using your truck hood for a rest. Maybe you shot one through your bedroom window out of your back yard. Worse yet, you may have baited one in or you may have really stooped low and shot one of those cats when it came in to finish eating the deer it worked so hard to kill so it could merely survive! How disgusting!

It's obvious to me you are the moral compass of hunters, you know how it should be done, we should all be like you or we should not hunt, we are all pathetic.
-
-
-
-
-
Well I'm very sorry for having to turn the table on you with those disgusting remarks. 

I just wanted to show you how prejudice and narrow minded you are being. As hunters we should all support each other in all legal pursuits of hunting. It's specifically these narrow minded tactics that continue to cause the erosion of hunting. Please see the phrase in the bottom of this post!

"Americans are systematically advocating, legislating, and voting away each others rights. Support all user groups & quit losing opportunity!"