Shed hunting trespassers and rule breakers

[bornhunter]

Rainier you ever need someone to hang out and keep eyes on your property give me a shout. Would just be there to let people know where they can and cant go. I am the guy who sent you that photo of a no trespassing sign on my property with a BPA easement. Took me about ten years to finally get the point across to people that BPA lines run across private land. Spent a lot of time sitting at access points on opening days and talking with people. Of course it helped being in a Sheriff's Office patrol vehicle from where I was employed for 31 years. 

So do you still have the vehicle? That would help! 

Nope, had to turn it in darn it.

[bigtex]

We need more enforcement of the rules we have and need to prosecute those that break the rules.

I've said it many times before, the problem with WA's trespassing laws is that they are actually too tough. Now before you erupt let me explain.

In WA any misdemeanor (or gross misdemeanor) requires a mandatory court appearance. Up until 2012 many natural resource misdemeanors could be handled by paying a fine (known as bail forfeiture) without appearing in court, and the vast majority of people simply paid their fine. Going way back (decades) many misdemeanors could be handled by paying a bail forfeiture. When bail forfeiture went away in 2012 (thank you WA Supreme Court) it meant you had to get prosecutor support (and time) for every misdemeanor case, so is the prosecutor going to take the fish snagging case or the DUI? The closed season deer case or the DV assault case? Thru the years WDFW has gone to the legislature and asked that they decriminalize many wildlife offenses turning them from crimes into infractions (similar to a traffic ticket.) Infractions don't go to a prosecutor and instead are directly filed with the court.

Just this year the timber industry went to the legislature and asked that most dumping offenses be turned from crimes to infractions. Reason being a guy who litters a pop can got a $103 ticket but the guy who emptied 30 garbage bags on the side of the road didn't get prosecuted because it's a misdemeanor. That has now changed.

So back to the original point of this response. Since criminal trespass 2nd degree (trespassing on someone's land) is a misdemeanor, most prosecutors don't even consider filing charges in these cases. Because again, are you going to spend the time on the DUI prosecution or the dirt biker trespassing on Joe's property? What needs to happen is the legislature needs to enact a trespass law that is an infraction that allows LEOs to simply cite someone with a ticket, and not have to deal with misdemeanor charges. 

[2MANY]

Cool story.
The problem is getting the LEO to show up timely in the first place.

[b0bbyg]

Bigtex, thanks for the background info.

[Rainier10]

Great info bigtex, I appreciate it.

[Dan-o]

Bigtex,
You always bring valuable info to the forum.
I really appreciate the factual information you share.

[LDennis24]

Thank you BigTex for defining the legal reasoning for this issue. That makes sense now. I know what the issue is because I discuss it with LE whenever I see them. I posted a rant earlier in this thread about LE having to decide if they are coming to your house for a guy walking in your yard or if they are going to the meth house to catch the guy hitting his girlfriend in the yard. And then the prosecutor having to make the same decision. Do they want to pursue your case of the bird hunter who was in the field or the guy who was trafficking fentanyl and got caught with 2000 pills and a bundle of cash and possibly caused 6 overdoses. If it was a simple infraction but a heavy one, this BS would end fairly quickly I believe.

[bearhunter99]

Thank you for the explanation Bigtex!  I can see how that affects everything.  It would be nice if they could change that and hope they make it a significant one.  A $50 infraction won't make much of a difference, they will take the risk because the money they get for the sheds will more than make up for it.  The infraction needs to be significant to be effective.

[Rainier10]

My guess is when it was a simple fine people wanted a higher penalty so they modified it to what it is now and everyone ended up actually losing. Well except for the rule breakers, they always win.

[Rainier10]

I took a photo of the road, I own both sides. My back is at a tree that has a sign on it and directly across the road is another sign. If you zoom in on this photo you can see three signs on the right side of the road and two for sure but there are really three on the left side of the road before it drops over the horizon. The horizon is 200 yards away from where I’m standing.  Pretty tough to say you didn't a see sign.

[Platensek-po]

If not wearing your seatbelt is a $150 dollar ticket then trespassing should be at least twice that. Then it should escalate with each consecutive incident. Would be nice to see some of that fine go back to the landowners who were the victims of the trespassing or dumping. If you have to get new signs or fencing or etc that should be paid by the trespasser as restitution.

[Rainier10]

My guess is after you get to a certain dollar figure it can’t just be a ticket that the courts don’t get involved in. @bigtex might know what that line is before it goes to a prosecutor.

[Platensek-po]

If not wearing your seatbelt is a $150 dollar ticket then trespassing should be at least twice that. Then it should escalate with each consecutive incident. Would be nice to see some of that fine go back to the landowners who were the victims of the trespassing or dumping. If you have to get new signs or fencing or etc that should be paid by the trespasser as restitution.

Also if caught trespassing while hunting after multiple instances a suspension of hunting privileges and retaking of hunters ed should be a requirement 

[Platensek-po]

My guess is after you get to a certain dollar figure it can’t just be a ticket that the courts don’t get involved in. @bigtex might know what that line is before it goes to a prosecutor.

That could be and sounds right. Might be other punishments available like suspension of hunting licenses, community service etc?

[bigtex]

My guess is after you get to a certain dollar figure it can’t just be a ticket that the courts don’t get involved in. @bigtex might know what that line is before it goes to a prosecutor.

Has nothing to do with the fine but rather the classification of the offense (infraction, misdemeanor, etc.) Prosecutors handle misdemeanors and felonies. Infractions (simple tickets) are not handled by prosecutors and are just filed directly with the court and the defendant can immediately pay without seeing a judge.

There are several different types of infractions in WA including traffic, natural resource, and class 1, 2, 3, and 4 civil infractions. All of these have minimums and maximums written into law, however the legislature can (and has) write into law a higher fine for a specific offense(s). A perfect example are agricultural offenses which actually have the highest infraction fines in the state with some over $10,000 (repeat offenses).