Questions for WDFW LEO

[pianoman9701]

This is why some of us won't ever post half the stuff we do because so many rush to judgment without knowing enough to make that call.

True story right there.

That's some of it but mostly, I think experienced forum members tell people about the illegal stuff they post as a service, not an internet bashing. I would think someone would want to know if they were doing something illegal. If they don't know they're breaking the rules and no one says anything, they'll likely continue to be ignorant and get nailed for it sooner or later. 

Best done in a PM as opposed to the open forum, internet bashing is mostly taken out of it that way.
If I received a pm about a possible illegal situation I posted, I would find it easier to think the message was sent with good intent, and any embarrassment is limited.

But that won't help someone else who's ignorant of the law and reading the post, though. Some people just immediately assume everything's an attack. They're wrong far more than they're right on this forum.

Can you blame them?  Things seam to be looking up, but the trolling has been out of control for some time now.
If someone assumes an illegal act, ask in a pm first.  Then start another informative thread to educate if they feel so inclined.
Too many good threads get ruined because someone needs to chime in without any factual information.

I guess I haven't seen much of the trolling. But then again, I'm rarely on here, so...

[bearpaw]

This is why some of us won't ever post half the stuff we do because so many rush to judgment without knowing enough to make that call.

True story right there.

That's some of it but mostly, I think experienced forum members tell people about the illegal stuff they post as a service, not an internet bashing. I would think someone would want to know if they were doing something illegal. If they don't know they're breaking the rules and no one says anything, they'll likely continue to be ignorant and get nailed for it sooner or later. 

Best done in a PM as opposed to the open forum, internet bashing is mostly taken out of it that way.
If I received a pm about a possible illegal situation I posted, I would find it easier to think the message was sent with good intent, and any embarrassment is limited.

But that won't help someone else who's ignorant of the law and reading the post, though. Some people just immediately assume everything's an attack. They're wrong far more than they're right on this forum.

Can you blame them?  Things seam to be looking up, but the trolling has been out of control for some time now.
If someone assumes an illegal act, ask in a pm first.  Then start another informative thread to educate if they feel so inclined.
Too many good threads get ruined because someone needs to chime in without any factual information.

I'm not exactly sure what you mean by trolling? But we have clamped down on the negativity and that includes bashing the forum or other members!

[Elkcollector82]

This is why some of us won't ever post half the stuff we do because so many rush to judgment without knowing enough to make that call.

True story right there.

That's some of it but mostly, I think experienced forum members tell people about the illegal stuff they post as a service, not an internet bashing. I would think someone would want to know if they were doing something illegal. If they don't know they're breaking the rules and no one says anything, they'll likely continue to be ignorant and get nailed for it sooner or later. 

Best done in a PM as opposed to the open forum, internet bashing is mostly taken out of it that way.
If I received a pm about a possible illegal situation I posted, I would find it easier to think the message was sent with good intent, and any embarrassment is limited.

But that won't help someone else who's ignorant of the law and reading the post, though. Some people just immediately assume everything's an attack. They're wrong far more than they're right on this forum.

Can you blame them?  Things seam to be looking up, but the trolling has been out of control for some time now.
If someone assumes an illegal act, ask in a pm first.  Then start another informative thread to educate if they feel so inclined.
Too many good threads get ruined because someone needs to chime in without any factual information.

I'm not exactly sure what you mean by trolling? But we have clamped down on the negativity and that includes bashing the forum or other members!

With that said. Great job. You and others mods keep up the great work 

[baker5150]

This is why some of us won't ever post half the stuff we do because so many rush to judgment without knowing enough to make that call.

True story right there.

That's some of it but mostly, I think experienced forum members tell people about the illegal stuff they post as a service, not an internet bashing. I would think someone would want to know if they were doing something illegal. If they don't know they're breaking the rules and no one says anything, they'll likely continue to be ignorant and get nailed for it sooner or later. 

Best done in a PM as opposed to the open forum, internet bashing is mostly taken out of it that way.
If I received a pm about a possible illegal situation I posted, I would find it easier to think the message was sent with good intent, and any embarrassment is limited.

But that won't help someone else who's ignorant of the law and reading the post, though. Some people just immediately assume everything's an attack. They're wrong far more than they're right on this forum.

Can you blame them?  Things seam to be looking up, but the trolling has been out of control for some time now.
If someone assumes an illegal act, ask in a pm first.  Then start another informative thread to educate if they feel so inclined.
Too many good threads get ruined because someone needs to chime in without any factual information.

I'm not exactly sure what you mean by trolling? But we have clamped down on the negativity and that includes bashing the forum or other members!

I think things are a TON better since the new rules/layout/etc. took place. 
By trolling I meant that there were a few who seamed to love to point out anything they could find to cause a stir.  This seamed to happen a lot if a legality issue was in the mix.  The "clamp down" seams to have been exactly what was needed, and I commend the mods and you, Bearpaw for taking action.
I hope no one, especially Pman thinks I was trying to bash him/them or the forum.  Pman is certainly one of the good ones on here, he's always willing to have a civil discussion and keep it civil.

[pianoman9701]

I didn't take it that way. We're always good, baker. 

[Gringo31]

One side of me would love to throw out all sorts of hypothetical situations because I think it would be fun......


But....


Fact is that it is up to the LEO discretion to write you a visit to court or not.  It is THERE that you can/will find out if what you did is actually illegal. 

[Elkcollector82]

One side of me would love to throw out all sorts of hypothetical situations because I think it would be fun......


But....


Fact is that it is up to the LEO discretion to write you a visit to court or not.  It is THERE that you can/will find out if what you did is actually illegal.

It's only money right. Can't take it with you when you die.   

[bigtex]

To the original question. It would have to fall under the legal hunting season, hours, rules, etc in order for the person to shoot the bear, or WDFW can issue a damage/depredation permit.

I was the original author of that thread. Leaving aside the joke with which I started the post, the context is that there was a bear that showed up in my backyard, after shooting hours, and was taking apart my compost pile.

I tried shooing it off, and it wouldn't leave. I've got young kids, and really didn't want it hanging around. So I grabbed my daughter's 15-lb toy bow and a couple of her dull target arrows, and landed a couple of them on the bear from a reasonably safe distance. As expected, they bounced off, but one thumped it hard enough that it must have surprised it, and it took off.

I explicitly was *not* hunting it, nor was I intending to injure it - if that had been my intent (as it would have been two hours earlier), my hunting bow was close at hand. I just wanted to haze it enough that it didn't feel necessary to come back anytime soon. (And I haven't seen it since.)

My strong belief is that this was legal - the bear was damaging my property, was representing a threat to my family, and I took reasonable, measured and humane actions to drive it off. That certainly seems within the spirit and indeed the letter of the regs as I've seen them. But because it was a toy "bow" (as opposed to, say, throwing a couple rocks at it), I think some folks were worried that a warden might think otherwise. Obviously I don't, as I'm here talking about it :-).

Any additional thoughts?

I'm here to say the law would not be on your side.

1- Damaging your property: I'll be blunt, boohoo. State law requires a damage/depredation permit be issued in order for someone to take an animal who is doing damage. Otherwise anyone could say "well Officer that 5 point buck walked into my rose bushes and started tearing them up so I shot it, I want the horns and meat."

2- Representing a threat to your family: Based off what you said, no it didn't. A bear simply in a compost pile is not a threat to your family. Did it charge you? Did it growl at you? The self-defense claim is made often with bears and rarely is it found to be true.

3- You did not hunt the animal: By the letter of the law yes you did, harassment (you call it hazing) is included in the definition of "hunt"

4- "That certainly seems within the spirit and indeed the letter of the regs as I've seen them": Actually it's just the opposite. You will not find a RCW/WAC supporting what you did.

[Humptulips]

To the original question. It would have to fall under the legal hunting season, hours, rules, etc in order for the person to shoot the bear, or WDFW can issue a damage/depredation permit.

I was the original author of that thread. Leaving aside the joke with which I started the post, the context is that there was a bear that showed up in my backyard, after shooting hours, and was taking apart my compost pile.

I tried shooing it off, and it wouldn't leave. I've got young kids, and really didn't want it hanging around. So I grabbed my daughter's 15-lb toy bow and a couple of her dull target arrows, and landed a couple of them on the bear from a reasonably safe distance. As expected, they bounced off, but one thumped it hard enough that it must have surprised it, and it took off.

I explicitly was *not* hunting it, nor was I intending to injure it - if that had been my intent (as it would have been two hours earlier), my hunting bow was close at hand. I just wanted to haze it enough that it didn't feel necessary to come back anytime soon. (And I haven't seen it since.)

My strong belief is that this was legal - the bear was damaging my property, was representing a threat to my family, and I took reasonable, measured and humane actions to drive it off. That certainly seems within the spirit and indeed the letter of the regs as I've seen them. But because it was a toy "bow" (as opposed to, say, throwing a couple rocks at it), I think some folks were worried that a warden might think otherwise. Obviously I don't, as I'm here talking about it :-).

Any additional thoughts?

I'm here to say the law would not be on your side.

1- Damaging your property: I'll be blunt, boohoo. State law requires a damage/depredation permit be issued in order for someone to take an animal who is doing damage. Otherwise anyone could say "well Officer that 5 point buck walked into my rose bushes and started tearing them up so I shot it, I want the horns and meat."

2- Representing a threat to your family: Based off what you said, no it didn't. A bear simply in a compost pile is not a threat to your family. Did it charge you? Did it growl at you? The self-defense claim is made often with bears and rarely is it found to be true.

3- You did not hunt the animal: By the letter of the law yes you did, harassment (you call it hazing) is included in the definition of "hunt"

4- "That certainly seems within the spirit and indeed the letter of the regs as I've seen them": Actually it's just the opposite. You will not find a RCW/WAC supporting what you did.

I do not believe you are correct.
While Harassment  of wildlife does not seem to be defined per WAC or RCW, I do not believe shooting a toy arrow at a bear in your backyard rises to the level of Harassment. In the Living with Wildlife section under bears the Department recommends "Temporary scare techniques".
My understanding of the OP was this was done for safety reasons and not because of supposed damage to a compost pile. 
I cannot believe any court would consider this encounter with a toy arrow anything but a temporary scare technique considering the circumstances..

[Gringo31]

Which goes back to MY point of it's up the the individual LEO if you get to go present your case to a judge.

[fish vacuum]

I see no questions in the original post.

Sent from my SM-J700T using Tapatalk

[bigtex]

I see no questions in the original post.

Sent from my SM-J700T using Tapatalk

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk