Shed hunters score big trespassing on Hanford!

[Pinetar]

Sound like these guys weren't actually on Hanford property but actually the USFWS ALE (National Wildlife Refuge). So they will probably be cited for trespassing on a national wildlife refuge and collecting wildlife parts on a NWR.

My understanding is that the law was changed a few years ago making "unlawful removal of wildlife or wildlife parts" a big game violation.  So cant they have their license revoked and truck taken for this the same as poaching?

If TRUE that would be awesome and hopefully teach these idiots a lesson. And to think they did this for a bunch of chalky chewed up antlers

[h20hunter]

Sounds like these jokers need a mention in the dishonor roll.....

@Andy Walgamott 

[str8meat]

Federal land +federal crime = federal prison?

[Northwest Sportsman]

When it rains potential *censored*es of the Month, it pours *censored*es of the Month.

[bigtex]

Sound like these guys weren't actually on Hanford property but actually the USFWS ALE (National Wildlife Refuge). So they will probably be cited for trespassing on a national wildlife refuge and collecting wildlife parts on a NWR.

My understanding is that the law was changed a few years ago making "unlawful removal of wildlife or wildlife parts" a big game violation.  So cant they have their license revoked and truck taken for this the same as poaching?

It was not made a "big game violation" but rather simply an actual wildlife violation. Previously the only crime you could charge a guy with was criminal trespass 2nd degree which is not a wildlife violation and technically you could've kept the sheds.

In order for vehicles to be taken the vehicle must have been used in the commission of the crime (such as shooting from the truck.) Simply driving a truck "to the scene of the crime" is not enough. Also, vehicles are only seized for the most serious violations, not a guy trespassing shed hunting which is a misdemeanor (not even a gross misdemeanor.)

Since this occurred on the refuge it could be handled by WDFW through state courts or USFWS through federal court.

[Bango skank]

Sound like these guys weren't actually on Hanford property but actually the USFWS ALE (National Wildlife Refuge). So they will probably be cited for trespassing on a national wildlife refuge and collecting wildlife parts on a NWR.

My understanding is that the law was changed a few years ago making "unlawful removal of wildlife or wildlife parts" a big game violation.  So cant they have their license revoked and truck taken for this the same as poaching?

It was not made a "big game violation" but rather simply an actual wildlife violation. Previously the only crime you could charge a guy with was criminal trespass 2nd degree which is not a wildlife violation and technically you could've kept the sheds.

In order for vehicles to be taken the vehicle must have been used in the commission of the crime (such as shooting from the truck.) Simply driving a truck "to the scene of the crime" is not enough. Also, vehicles are only seized for the most serious violations, not a guy trespassing shed hunting which is a misdemeanor (not even a gross misdemeanor.)

Since this occurred on the refuge it could be handled by WDFW through state courts or USFWS through federal court.

So is removing sheds while trespassing something they can lose their hunting privledges over for a couple years?  I see that as a more effective deterrent than getting a trespassing ticket.

[Maverick]

Sound like these guys weren't actually on Hanford property but actually the USFWS ALE (National Wildlife Refuge). So they will probably be cited for trespassing on a national wildlife refuge and collecting wildlife parts on a NWR.

My understanding is that the law was changed a few years ago making "unlawful removal of wildlife or wildlife parts" a big game violation.  So cant they have their license revoked and truck taken for this the same as poaching?

It was not made a "big game violation" but rather simply an actual wildlife violation. Previously the only crime you could charge a guy with was criminal trespass 2nd degree which is not a wildlife violation and technically you could've kept the sheds.

In order for vehicles to be taken the vehicle must have been used in the commission of the crime (such as shooting from the truck.) Simply driving a truck "to the scene of the crime" is not enough. Also, vehicles are only seized for the most serious violations, not a guy trespassing shed hunting which is a misdemeanor (not even a gross misdemeanor.)

Since this occurred on the refuge it could be handled by WDFW through state courts or USFWS through federal court.

They'd keep the sheds?!

[bigtex]

Sound like these guys weren't actually on Hanford property but actually the USFWS ALE (National Wildlife Refuge). So they will probably be cited for trespassing on a national wildlife refuge and collecting wildlife parts on a NWR.

My understanding is that the law was changed a few years ago making "unlawful removal of wildlife or wildlife parts" a big game violation.  So cant they have their license revoked and truck taken for this the same as poaching?

It was not made a "big game violation" but rather simply an actual wildlife violation. Previously the only crime you could charge a guy with was criminal trespass 2nd degree which is not a wildlife violation and technically you could've kept the sheds.

In order for vehicles to be taken the vehicle must have been used in the commission of the crime (such as shooting from the truck.) Simply driving a truck "to the scene of the crime" is not enough. Also, vehicles are only seized for the most serious violations, not a guy trespassing shed hunting which is a misdemeanor (not even a gross misdemeanor.)

Since this occurred on the refuge it could be handled by WDFW through state courts or USFWS through federal court.

They'd keep the sheds?!

Prior to the law being enacted in 2012 yes, because the violation was trespass (not a wildlife violation.)

[bigtex]

Sound like these guys weren't actually on Hanford property but actually the USFWS ALE (National Wildlife Refuge). So they will probably be cited for trespassing on a national wildlife refuge and collecting wildlife parts on a NWR.

My understanding is that the law was changed a few years ago making "unlawful removal of wildlife or wildlife parts" a big game violation.  So cant they have their license revoked and truck taken for this the same as poaching?

It was not made a "big game violation" but rather simply an actual wildlife violation. Previously the only crime you could charge a guy with was criminal trespass 2nd degree which is not a wildlife violation and technically you could've kept the sheds.

In order for vehicles to be taken the vehicle must have been used in the commission of the crime (such as shooting from the truck.) Simply driving a truck "to the scene of the crime" is not enough. Also, vehicles are only seized for the most serious violations, not a guy trespassing shed hunting which is a misdemeanor (not even a gross misdemeanor.)

Since this occurred on the refuge it could be handled by WDFW through state courts or USFWS through federal court.

So is removing sheds while trespassing something they can lose their hunting privledges over for a couple years?  I see that as a more effective deterrent than getting a trespassing ticket.

Not for the single violation. But it does count towards their fish and wildlife conviction record where if they accumulate so many convictions in a 10 year period the department can then suspend their hunting privileges.

[C-Money]

Tagging along...frustrating for sure.

[trophyhunt]

Federal land +federal crime = federal prison?

my memory sucks but didn’t a couple employees poach a big bull on Hanford a couple years ago, and I thought they kept their jobs?

[blackveltbowhunter]

This is nothing new. I'm glad the guys got caught and if this story is true should get the book thrown at them. But overall my frustration lies with enforcement of these rules. This is one instance, for one group, in one spot. EVEN if they hammered them, ( I do think the loss of hunting privileges' might be a good start as deterrent) Its so hit and miss it doesn't even make a dent in the actual loss of antler to those willing to brazenly go into these closed areas, or game areas before the opener.

[bobcat]

Why should the loss of hunting privliges be a penalty for someone trespassing to pick up shed antlers? They weren't hunting and might not even be hunters.

[Pegasus]

Why should the loss of hunting privliges be a penalty for someone trespassing to pick up shed antlers? They weren't hunting and might not even be hunters.

Regulated by the WDFW might have something to do with it? Turns out they were not on the Hanford Reservation where they could have faced some serious trespassing penalties.

[DeerSkin]

So far the landowner tells me that the 4 men will be getting charged by the State & Federal game wardens. They didn’t tell him what all those charges include yet. I do know that 2 of the men are only in there early 20’s it’s to bad these young guys are starting out with such a record on wildlife violations & trespassing.