Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle

[WAPatriot]

If a unit isn't a true spike unit a branched antler bull can be harvested one side needs to be a spike unless you have the raffle tag imo

[Bullkllr]

Some first poster may know a little more than you think. Just seeing what everybody else "knew" is all. No muddy water

Seems the most important thing that's been established is a branch antler bull was killed in 334. It is illegal to kill a branch antler bull in 334.
I'd focus on that. None of the other stuff matters.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Mfowl]

If a unit isn't a true spike unit a branched antler bull can be harvested one side needs to be a spike unless you have the raffle tag imo

GMU 334 (Ellensburg) is specifically closed to branch antlered bull harvest. It has nothing to do with true spike vs spike. Raffle tag holders are not exempt from this rule.

[jackelope]

If a unit isn't a true spike unit a branched antler bull can be harvested one side needs to be a spike unless you have the raffle tag imo

This is a non-factor and it does not make any sense at all. The guy had the raffle tag.

[jackelope]

Just for the folks who are late to the party. One fact is that the bull was killed in GMU 334. The other fact is that GMu 334 does not have a season in it for branch antler bulls.

[Alchase]

Some first poster may know a little more than you think. Just seeing what everybody else "knew" is all. No muddy water

Then welcome to Hunting Washington, we would love to hear what you know!

[Pinetar]

334 isnt a true spike unit.

If 334 isn't a true spike unit (exception early archery) then tell me what it is

[lord grizzly]

Some first poster may know a little more than you think. Just seeing what everybody else "knew" is all. No muddy water

Then welcome to Hunting Washington, we would love to hear what you know!

I'm just the new guy. Ears open mouth closed. For the most part...

[JDHasty]

The hail Mary long shot is that GMU 334 is tru-spike General and spike in the Late General.  It would be a long shot and that is something I recognized early on but kept that loophole to myself.

Is a spike w/a second one-inch or longer point on one side EVER recognized as a branch antlered animal in an area only open to hunting spike elk hunting?  I suppose that if you are already HUNTING IN A BRANCH ANTLER ONLY hunting area, in which true spikes are not legal or in an antler point restriction area then an inch or ?more/less? is pertinent in defining a legal animal as branched antler?
 

This is a distinction that defines the animal down into spike status in spike only areas and up in areas closed to spike elk hunting.  Since we are discussing GMU 334 the answer is only down to spike status is relevant.  Only antlerless, true spikes or spikes are ever legal.   

The restriction on the Raffle Tag unambiguously states "not open to branch antlered bull elk hunting."   In order to cary the argument you would have to prove that an animal that is legal in GMU 334 the animal would have to be defined up to branch antler states in order to be legal.  If not why not? 

What the Controlling Legal Authority (the Game Regs) clearly and unambiguously limits hunters to in GMU 334 is an elk that has NO MORE THAN ONE ANTLER with a second point EVER.  For the purpose of satisfying the law an elk that has a second or more points is a spike and not a branched antler bull in a spike only area so long as the other antler does not branch.

It is defined as a SPIKE in an area like GMU 334 and shooting such a an animal means you shot a "spike."  NOT a branched antler animal.  GMU 334 is not open to shooting branched antler elk EVER.  Period.  Full stop.

In other words GMU 334 is not open to branched antler elk hunting.

[Jpmiller]

As far as I can see it still boils down to what question was asked on his call to WDFW and what their answer was.


Whether or not he knew what the answer was before he asked the question is impossible to know, but if you can't go to WDFW for clarification who can you go to?

[dscubame]

As far as I can see it still boils down to what question was asked on his call to WDFW and what their answer was.


Whether or not he knew what the answer was before he asked the question is impossible to know, but if you can't go to WDFW for clarification who can you go to?

The state published regulations like everyone else.

[Jpmiller]

As far as I can see it still boils down to what question was asked on his call to WDFW and what their answer was.


Whether or not he knew what the answer was before he asked the question is impossible to know, but if you can't go to WDFW for clarification who can you go to?

The state published regulations like everyone else.

I shared the story in an earlier post about asking WDFW about a few of the restriction on legal bows for hunting that I didnt think I fully inderstood before I purchased one . Am I in the same boat as Reichert then?

Assuming he asked if shooting the bull was legal.

[dscubame]

As far as I can see it still boils down to what question was asked on his call to WDFW and what their answer was.


Whether or not he knew what the answer was before he asked the question is impossible to know, but if you can't go to WDFW for clarification who can you go to?

The state published regulations like everyone else.

I shared the story in an earlier post about asking WDFW about a few of the restriction on legal bows for hunting that I didnt think I fully inderstood before I purchased one . Am I in the same boat as Reichert then?

Assuming he asked if shooting the bull was legal.

If you do not understand a area in the regs that may be a little grey than yes you should inquire as you did.

[JDHasty]

As far as I can see it still boils down to what question was asked on his call to WDFW and what their answer was.


Whether or not he knew what the answer was before he asked the question is impossible to know, but if you can't go to WDFW for clarification who can you go to?

The state published regulations like everyone else.

Again, at the risk of repeating myself:  We are not talking about an intern, we now know that we are talking about Morgan Grant, and his supervisor Rich Mann. 

Let me go out on a limb, knowing Rich Mann and knowing Morgan Grant's rep, any question was answered thus - what do the Game Regs say?  So you have just answered your own question. 

If a legally defined "spike" with a legal second point or seventy points on the second antler is a "spike' In GMU 334 then it means that the area is still "not open for branched antler bull elk."  It is open only for elk that can legally be defined as a spike.

If the same elk were in a different GMU then he is branched antlered and that is not so hard to figure out that any of my ten-year old hunter-ed students could miss that question.  An elk can be legal in a spike only area and also legal in a branched antler area with two steps.   

The thing that matters is that a "spike" is a legal spike and defined as ONLY being a "spike" in GMU 334 irrespective of whether an adjacent unit would recognize that very same elk as a legal branched antler bull.   

[haus]

Is there any case history where an internet forum owner was successfully sued for unsubstantiated statements posted by a forum member?

This isn't Gawker, and these posts are child's play compared to anything you'd see on YouTube, Twitter, or hell even the foxnews comments section.