Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle

[idahohuntr]

In the 2016 regs unit 334 is listed under modern firearm for true spike bull. So should the guy that shoots  a spike bull with a rifle in that unit be ticketed because it is actually a firearms restricted area? Should he have known this is a restricted area even though the regs have it listed for modern firearm?

It's always the hunter's responsibility to know ALL the rules and regulations for the unit he is hunting.

Was that really a serious question?

And for the record I agree it is the hunters responsibility to know the laws. For me personally if I have a question on legality I would think I did my due diligence if I called the WDFW and got an answer to my question.

Let's say someone this season Looks at the regs and sees unit 334 says it's open for modern to shoot a spike. Then calls WDFW to verify they can shoot a spike with a centerfire rifle in that unit, and are told it's fine. Do you believe A, they should be sited for that, and B be labeled all over these forums a poacher?

Yes,
It's also in the regs that its restricted. You can't choose which regs your want to read and follow. If they can read certain parts of the regs they can read the whole thing. I don't understand the selective reasoning by you.

I've asked numerous times...what prompted you guys to call wdfw? Something someone told you, something you read in the regs, the feeling that bulls don't get that big living in a field where seasons are ever open for them? You obviously realized something was not right...what was it?

[JDHasty]

In the 2016 regs unit 334 is listed under modern firearm for true spike bull. So should the guy that shoots  a spike bull with a rifle in that unit be ticketed because it is actually a firearms restricted area? Should he have known this is a restricted area even though the regs have it listed for modern firearm?

It's always the hunter's responsibility to know ALL the rules and regulations for the unit he is hunting.

Was that really a serious question?

And for the record I agree it is the hunters responsibility to know the laws. For me personally if I have a question on legality I would think I did my due diligence if I called the WDFW and got an answer to my question.

Let's say someone this season Looks at the regs and sees unit 334 says it's open for modern to shoot a spike. Then calls WDFW to verify they can shoot a spike with a centerfire rifle in that unit, and are told it's fine. Do you believe A, they should be sited for that, and B be labeled all over these forums a poacher?

Yes,
It's also in the regs that its restricted. You can't choose which regs your want to read and follow. If they can read certain parts of the regs they can read the whole thing. I don't understand the selective reasoning by you.

  they should be cited and "it depends" whether or not they should be labeled a poacher.   If it was negligence, as in an oversight or just poor judgement in failing to read and understand the restrictions on the tag they are holding and/or the Unit they are hunting in, then it could be that they just screwed up.  It could be an isolated case of using poor judgement. 

However if they participated in a deliberate and systematic orchestration of a scheme by which they could take an animal they know (like have been told numerous times), or should know (like in have been told numerous times but are too thick headed), is not legal in the GMU they are hunting in...  then they are a poacher and an unrepentant poacher at that.

By saying they "knew" and we're told is dishonest at best, but more like slanderous in reality. But it your repeat it enough a few of the other city guys might believe another city guy.......

You set up a hypothetical situation and invited response and I responded to the hypothetical you set up. 

[Bullkllr]

I can see trying to defend a friend, or whatever. But come on...from the outside looking in, this does not look like a simple mistake, an oversight, or anything that could  possibly be legitimized with a phone call.

And compared to the several other websites I have seen this issue addressed, the discussion here has been calm and civilized.

[Reidus]

Seems like a guy could go to a game farm and shoot a bigger one for a whole lot cheaper and a whole lot less hassle.

[kiticaashunter]

In the 2016 regs unit 334 is listed under modern firearm for true spike bull. So should the guy that shoots  a spike bull with a rifle in that unit be ticketed because it is actually a firearms restricted area? Should he have known this is a restricted area even though the regs have it listed for modern firearm?

It's always the hunter's responsibility to know ALL the rules and regulations for the unit he is hunting.

Was that really a serious question?

And for the record I agree it is the hunters responsibility to know the laws. For me personally if I have a question on legality I would think I did my due diligence if I called the WDFW and got an answer to my question.

Let's say someone this season Looks at the regs and sees unit 334 says it's open for modern to shoot a spike. Then calls WDFW to verify they can shoot a spike with a centerfire rifle in that unit, and are told it's fine. Do you believe A, they should be sited for that, and B be labeled all over these forums a poacher?

Yes,
It's also in the regs that its restricted. You can't choose which regs your want to read and follow. If they can read certain parts of the regs they can read the whole thing. I don't understand the selective reasoning by you.

I don't see how that is selective reasoning?  If I have a question, you are saying calling WDFW for clarification is not enough?  Let's say I can't read because of a disability so I call WDFW to ask about the rules, I a a poacher if they give me bad info?

Most logical people would and do agree a person who is proactive and calls WDFW  to make sure they are legal should be able to trust that info. Guess there is always going to be that jealous crowd of guys like you and a few others on here that will jump on a witchhunt.

[JimmyHoffa]

Seems like a guy could go to a game farm and shoot a bigger one for a whole lot cheaper and a whole lot less hassle.

I believe that would only qualify for SCI, not B&C.  The bull in question I think will be eligible for B&C for muzzleloader.

[kiticaashunter]

.....So, preach to me about how you have never broke a law before hunting...   


Pope, there may be some people butt hurt about his money.  And you are right, most will have broken game laws somewhere along the line.

This is a Clintonian what’s the definition of “is” type of argument that is being made. It’s a legalistic bit of maneuvering, a charade. People aren’t dumb. They can read the regs.  It’s plain as day that  this discussion of true vs regular spike was an attempt to thread a legal needle.   They were hoping, angling and prying to get someone at WDFW to contort the regs into a pretzel in order to claim the unit was open to branch bull hunting. Not caring that even if they would say it’s “ok” that it should never be done.  That particular bull, where it lived, should not have been shot as a matter of good public relations and decency.

To the others that think his reputation is at stake in the court case.  No, it isn’t.  A very popular animal, open to public view and regularly photographed, safe from any legal hunting pressure, living in wide open alfalfa fields, no longer behaving like a wild elk in or out of elk season was shot with the ease of a killing a heifer by a someone who paid $50k+ for the privilege, observed now by hunters who see the rules as clear as water.  The harm to reputation has nothing to do with the case outcome. Many legal, yet repugnant, things can be done.  If you know that bull has notoriety and is loved in the community and you wiggle around a way to shoot it anyway right on that open field, you are putting a stick right in those people’s eye.  There’s no way around that fact. A call may insulate you from legal penalty, but it can do nothing to protect someone from the public’s judgment.

A satirical description of the hunt:

I drove up on the black top and parked.  A school bus and a mom in her minivan passed by.  Still in the cab, the wily creature was hard to make out as it stood in the thickest cover, the deepest 10 inches of alfalfa this field was choked with.  I put down my road mug of starbucks and the second half of my bear claw on the dash. I pulled up my Swaro 10x50’s, yep, that’s the bull. He was a bit faint, but at 100 yards I was able to pick him out through the thick stuff.  My door closing behind me with a thud I made for the back of the truck.  My buddy Zeb helped and loaded the gun.  My friends and I all wore jeans and flannel shirts so that we would fit in the bull’s natural environment. Just another farmer  over here, no worries mr elk (at least that’s the theory). I could hear traffic and children’s voices in the distance of this wild place.  Next we came up with a plan to get on this beast.  After much debate…. I began to walk straight at him.  One, two, three steps, stopped.  Forgot my hat on the hood of the truck. Darn it!!! I hope this doesn’t spoil the stalk.  I went back for my hat when it occurred to me that I hadn’t finished my danish so I opened the rig and stuffed the 2nd half in my mouth and pulled my hat down tight for the stalk.  My pulse rate was easily 70 now with the anticipation. I pulled up my Swaros again, there he was, now laying down and chewing cud in the gnarly thicket, looking straight at me.  Though he was unable to see me in the extreme farmer break up pattern we’re wearing.  Two, three, four steps.  I’m getting sweaty now and a little nervous so I take a couple minutes to calm down.  Five…. That oughta do it. BANG. Flop.

YEAAAAAAAAAH!!!!!!  WHAHOOO!!!!!  What a hunt, what a great animal…!!   Hi Mrs Johnson, we’ll get it out of the field in just a minute, nice dress you have on, is that paisley?

Doesn't seem most on here agree with this post. They are just fine when another member on here helps kill a yard bull that some called Cupcake and even used bait. It was also a very well known bull. In fact your story you came up with much more resembles that situation than the one we are talking about here.if one shouldn't have been done for public relations and decency, the other one should definitely not have either. But the some on here call Cupcake a trophy, but not the other....

[257 Wby Mag]

Speaking for myself...

I see a lot of hatred of the fact that the guy has been successful in life. This is America, we all have a choice in what direction we take with our lives and we all have the option of doing what it takes to make a better living so we can afford to buy these tags. The irony that nobody considers is that the money from these special tags helps fund wildlife management and ultimately keeps the price lower for everyone else to hunt cheaper. 

FACT, many comments involve: his wealth; that he got a big bull most thought was off-limits; or that it was easy to shoot the bull, he didn't have to hike 20 miles and summit a dozen mountains to kill it. We all have different reasons why we hunt and we all have different methods how we hunt, but none of that should be a part of this conversation, ethics is a different conversation.

It sounds like he had landowner permission and WDFW permission to shoot the bull, unless that is proven false in court it may be pretty hard to convict him of breaking the law. The question is did he violate the law or not, in my opinion we should let the court figure out the truth!

(These comments are my personal opinion, Hunting-Washington is an internet service provider and has taken no official position on this issue.)

Hunters just like to bring down other hunters for some reason.  They claim it's not jealousy but I see that in many responses on this thread.  The moral hunt police are the most hypocritical people I meet.  Those that claim and preach they follow the law and bash someone that makes a mistake only makes me more suspicious of them.  It's no different than the preacher or politician railing against gay people.  Yep, they are gay.  I see it time after time in my profession with hunting charges.  They get up and say to the judge they teach hunter ed, work for WDFW,, never break the law, etc. in front of the judge.

Unlawful Big Game hunting encompasses a lot of different types of conduct.  Whether you have a tag but are just out of the unit, tag an animal later, tag it for someone else, etc.  I'm still maintaining probably half the people calling out TR have done this or a Title 77 charge at some point in their life.  Those that preach the loudest are probably the biggest offenders.  I've hunted with zillions of people over the years and tons on Huntwa.  So has Bearpaw and I bet he sees small issues daily.  Maybe they don't have their hunter orange on, have their clip loaded in the car, etc.  Most guys cut a corner here and there but maybe not that serious of a crime.  Do the best you can and they are so confusing your bound to error into an issue you didn't realize.  Lots of archers don't have the proper arrow for their bow under the law.

So, preach to me about how you have never broke a law before hunting...   

Pope, you seem to be a very reasonable guy. I don't recall seeing a post you made that I don't agree with. I think you nailed it on this one. I have been told a guy who has been very vocal on this and many other forums on this issue has had more than one legal issue himself with game laws. Is that type of thing public information? I don't know where to find it? If it is public info  I would like to know how to find it so it it was posted here no rules were broken by posting personal information.

I agree, pope is level minded, that's why it's dumb y some of his buddys are so gung ho to hang riechert, yet it's funny they hang onto his success pics like little high school girls....

The second part, y as that would be epic, I'm sure very few here have yet to scew the rules while hunting, or fishing.....

[257 Wby Mag]

Seems like a guy could go to a game farm and shoot a bigger one for a whole lot cheaper and a whole lot less hassle.

I believe that would only qualify for SCI, not B&C.  The bull in question I think will be eligible for B&C for muzzleloader.

I'd simply r a t her have Washington's wildlife benefit from his $$$$ than some high fence outfit... who cares about record books....

[snake]

The money does not go to conservation.  Sorry to break your hearts.  Just for fun, find a law you consider confusing, call 2 or 3 wdfw offices and ask them for an answer.  I guarantee  you will get more than one answer.  I have done it many times.  Sometimes they even tell me it depends on the game wardens interpretation of the rule whether you will get a ticket or not."

[Dan-o]

The money does not go to conservation.  Sorry to break your hearts.  Just for fun, find a law you consider confusing, call 2 or 3 wdfw offices and ask them for an answer.  I guarantee  you will get more than one answer.  I have done it many times.  Sometimes they even tell me it depends on the game wardens interpretation of the rule whether you will get a ticket or not."

Are you sure the money doesn't go to conservation?

[NOCK NOCK]

Here is a scenario,  Speed limit is 60mph from point A to point B, (point B is their destination)

1. A person drives their car from A to B @ 80mph. Did they break the law? Was this action illegal or legal?

2. A person drives their car from A to B @ 80mph. Before arriving at their destination, a cop pulls them over and cites them with a speeding infraction. Did they break the law???  Again, illegal or legal???

This is why I believe most on here are furious with the happenings of this killing.

1. Of course speeding is illegal, just because you got away with it....does not make it the right thing to do.
2. Of course they broke law by speeding.


Also I want to address a couple things that are repeated on here over and over again.

Jealousy... I'll bite......YES I am jealous of TR's wealth, but heck I am jealous of anyone who has more money than I do. Money can buy a guy a lot of fun, and who doesn't like to have fun?

Money cannot buy a person love or happiness(get both those from my wife )
Am I jealous that I can not afford to buy expensive hunting opportunity's like TR?  Nope.  My idea of a fun hunt is drastically different than this Bullwinkle killing.

Hunting: The act of searching for something or someone. How a person defines hunting varies.
My passion is hunting, all kinds;  game animals, mushrooms, sheds, gold panning, metal detecting, rock hounding, geo-caching, anything I can get outside and search for I'm addicted to it. If these things were laying around everywhere, what fun would that be?  To me, what happened with Bullwinkle was not hunting by the trigger man (his paid help did the hunting), it was just killing.

Do I believe this "hunt" was illegal?  Yep
Do I feel TR will get away with it.  Yep, But that doesn't make it right. IMHO 
PS: I hope I am wrong.
 

[emac]

I can see trying to defend a friend, or whatever. But come on...from the outside looking in, this does not look like a simple mistake, an oversight, or anything that could  possibly be legitimized with a phone call.

And compared to the several other websites I have seen this issue addressed, the discussion here has been calm and civilized.

What other sites is this being discussed on. I wanna see other train wrecks

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

[Curly]

Here is a scenario,  Speed limit is 60mph from point A to point B, (point B is their destination)

1. A person drives their car from A to B @ 80mph. Did they break the law? Was this action illegal or legal?

2. A person drives their car from A to B @ 80mph. Before arriving at their destination, a cop pulls them over and cites them with a speeding infraction. Did they break the law???  Again, illegal or legal???

This is why I believe most on here are furious with the happenings of this killing.

1. Of course speeding is illegal, just because you got away with it....does not make it the right thing to do.
2. Of course they broke law by speeding.

What about person C who calls an officer before leaving on his trip and asks if it is okay to drive 80 from point A to B?  And the officer says go ahead?

[NOCK NOCK]

Here is a scenario,  Speed limit is 60mph from point A to point B, (point B is their destination)

1. A person drives their car from A to B @ 80mph. Did they break the law? Was this action illegal or legal?

2. A person drives their car from A to B @ 80mph. Before arriving at their destination, a cop pulls them over and cites them with a speeding infraction. Did they break the law???  Again, illegal or legal???

This is why I believe most on here are furious with the happenings of this killing.

1. Of course speeding is illegal, just because you got away with it....does not make it the right thing to do.
2. Of course they broke law by speeding.

What about person C who calls an officer before leaving on his trip and asks if it is okay to drive 80 from point A to B?  And the officer says go ahead?

LOL, Well lets say this was in WA ST. What state is the officer from?  Oregon?  Does he have jurisdiction?  Did this officer author the law?  Was he jealous?  Or just hunting for some revenue?
A law is a law, break it and it's still illegal.
If I tell ya to jump off a cliff with no parachute, are you going to?   Trust me you'll be fine.