Buckley Elk shot in city limits

[Mandownitis]

I heard about this from a co-worker.  So I looked it up.  

 http://www.pnwlocalnews.com/south_king/ech/news/105217779.html[/url]

[PolarBear]

While I think that shooting it in city limits was not the smartest thing legal or not, the bigger issue is the fruitcake who wrote the article!  That dude is nuttier than a squirrel turd and needs to lay off the disney and PETA shows!

[gasman]

If it was legal, then who cares.

This guy is just pissed that his pet is gone 

[TheHunt]

I know that bull as I have driven by that bull many times.   The funny part of that story is that same bull have been there for six years.   NOT...    There is always a good bull with those cows. 

[woodrat]

well, yeah, poorly written article for sure. I think that "gaming laws" have more to do with gambling than hunting, for example. 

But that was NOT a legal hunt, obviously, or he wouldn't have been cited for municipal firearms violations. Not tagging and keeping the animal would be wasting it, but I'm still confused as to why should he be allowed to keep an animal he shot on someone else's private property without permission, in violation of local laws. As far as I'm concerned, anyone shooting in a residential neighborhood, while trespassing, in city limits, in violation of city law, should have the book thrown at him. Anyone who is shooting an elk, while trespassing, unaware that there are houses in the line of fire, is a first class jerk, and this is exactly the kind of event that turns public opinion against hunting.

Look at page 86 of your WDFW regs and read "hunter's code of conduct".

[Michelle_Nelson]

If it was legal, then who cares.

This guy is just pissed that his pet is gone 

I'd be pissed to if they trespassed on to my land witout permision to shoot my pet elk!

I know exactly where that elk was shot. 

[krout81]

Boy oh Boy, I wonder what the fine is for shooting in the city limits?  He should have know better then to shoot a high powered rifle where people live, and he probably knew he was tresspassing.  

[thurman]

i heard that he shot it with a muzelloader during muzelloader season and thats why the game department didnt get involved.

[rasbo]

he was tresspassing and should get full penalties for that,and fined big time for shooting in the city limits..If the story is true, he admitted he didnt know what was past the trees..I will be curious as to what the fines will be..Will they be enough to keep idiots from tresspassing again or will they be so little that its worth it to bag a nice bull...

[Fl0und3rz]

Boy oh Boy, I wonder what the fine is for shooting in the city limits?  He should have know better then to shoot a high powered rifle where people live, and he probably knew he was tresspassing.  

As pointed out by some, it was a muzzleloader.

If this was in Pierce County then it would be one or more misdemeanor(s).  Note that muzzleloaders are firearms within the Pierce County Code.

From the Pierce County Code:

9.32.070 Discharge of Firearms Prohibited or Restricted. Pursuant to RCW 9.41.300(2), the Pierce County Council may designate certain areas of Pierce County where the discharge of firearms shall be prohibited or restricted. Citizens may petition the County Council for the formation, dissolution or amendment of an area where the discharge of firearms shall be prohibited or restricted or the Council may initiate the creation, dissolution or amendment of such an area by passing a resolution declaring its intent to do so. Under no circumstances shall the County Council designate a prohibited or restricted area until the Firearms Advisory Commission, created pursuant to Chapter 2.79 of the Pierce County Code, has had an opportunity to review the proposal and make its recommendation to the Council. No single proposal for an area where the discharge of firearms shall be prohibited or restricted may exceed 160 acres. (Ord. 2004-72s § 1 (part), 2004; Ord. 90-45 § 1 (part), 1990; Ord. 84-172 (part), 1984; prior Code § 35.28.010)

9.32.080 Discharge Near Buildings. In all areas of Pierce County where the discharge of firearms is not prohibited or restricted pursuant to 9.32.070, it shall be unlawful to discharge a firearm within 500 feet toward any building occupied by people or domestic animals or used for storage of flammable or combustible materials. It shall be unlawful to discharge a firearm within 1,000 feet toward any K-12 school within the County. (Ord. 2004-72s § 1 (part), 2004; Ord. 90-45 § 1 (part), 1990; prior Code § 35.28.020)

9.32.090 Violations of Sections 9.32.070 and 9.32.080. Any person who violates any of the provisions of Sections 9.32.070 or 9.32.080 shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. (Prior Code § 35.28.030)

[gasman]

Did I miss some tthing 

I seen no info to state that he was trespassing. Where are you getting this info from 

What is he had permisson to hunt a farmers field, then what.

[MIKEXRAY]

You must of missed it in the story, it said he was trespassing and the owner actually had the police come back and site him for it. I also don't agree that he should be allowed to trespass, kill an animal on private property & then keep the animal. I don't care about " pet elk ", I just know that if I had property with elk on it ( my dream ) I would be pissed if someone was on my property killing elk. I hope the hunter gets the max. Mike

[huntlakewood]

 I also don't agree that he should be allowed to trespass, kill an animal on private property & then keep the animal. I don't care about " pet elk ", I just know that if I had property with elk on it ( my dream ) I would be pissed if someone was on my property killing elk. I hope the hunter gets the max. Mike
[/quote]

I think the meat should have been given to the land owner at the expense of using that guys tag and the trespasser should get the book.

[stormin85]

I wondered when this would show up on here, as far as trespassing, he was and the owner has had a lot of problems this year alone with that, do i think he should put up signs, yeah, but to each their own, the statement about the pet elk i am suprised by, i didn't hear it that way, the owner was upset that this person obviously knew elk were on his property frequently, or at least enough to be out there looking for them, and then waited for this bull to come out, if you know where this is you know how obvious it would be that you are within a very close distance of houses and the city, his family members and grand kids play on the property and the last few incidents that happened there was nothing done about the hunters who were trespassing, i guess the statement could have been made to further along the damage the guy caused beyond just endangering the people around there?

Is it really his pet no, but it ends up being like one, do i still want to shoot it? sure. taking a bull that easy would be nice. but thats not really hunting and that is what was frustrating, its his property the hunter should have been at least smart enough to ask someone if it was private land, i find it hard to believe that the guy was truly unaware that he was not on public land, he lives in Bonney Lake, its not like he is out of state, i know where there are elk in Enumclaw, they cross private and public land if i ever had the inclination to hunt them, i would get permission from as many property owners around there as possible to make sure i wasn't going to end up in the same boat, but then hunting these elk is very similar to hunting cattle, their still skiddish but they are used to people, bowhunting them might still be a challenge, any type of gun is not.

[gasman]

Yeah, I missed it. There was two links before and i only read the first one, thinking they were both to the same place.


He should have the book thrown at him for breaking the law  

[bushmaster]

The elk was shot on private property, in the city limits. The key word here is "private" property. New thread in 10 min.

[chad s.]

If it's private property then post it! I read you don't have to in Buckley; however, if you really care about your pet elk why don't you show it???

[rasbo]

If it's private property then post it! I read you don't have to in Buckley; however, if you really care about your pet elk why don't you show it???

Im sure its a state law not having to post your property,I could be wrong..But it wasnt his property so hes still in the wrong..I guess we should post our cars and everything else so some lame ass knows its not his..Hunters and citizens need to know themselves where the lines are..

[huntlakewood]

If it's private property then post it! I read you don't have to in Buckley; however, if you really care about your pet elk why don't you show it???

Im sure its a state law not having to post your property,I could be wrong..But it wasnt his property so hes still in the wrong..I guess we should post our cars and everything else so some lame ass knows its not his..Hunters and citizens need to know themselves where the lines are..

When my kid went through hunters ed they had to go through the walking course and there was a gate set up with no signs. She was marked down on that part of it cause she still did not ask permission. They had told her and every one else in the class even know it is not posted it is still private property and it is conted as tresspassing. ( only two people did not get marked down on that one)

[wayner]

If it's private property then post it! I read you don't have to in Buckley; however, if you really care about your pet elk why don't you show it???

Im sure its a state law not having to post your property,I could be wrong..But it wasnt his property so hes still in the wrong..I guess we should post our cars and everything else so some lame ass knows its not his..Hunters and citizens need to know themselves where the lines are..

[bigtex]

Geez again??

This story was posted a couple weeks ago and discussed in length...

[woodrat]

From what I understand, state law is that private property does not have to be posted to still be private property. Some guys I know got in trouble with that this deer season, and tried to say that it shouldn't matter because the land wasn't posted. In the end, they got let go on it, because there was no obvious boundary, like a fence, tree line, ditch, what have you, but they've been warned. It's not like there's not a ton of public and corporate land available to hunt on.

You're supposed to know where you're hunting, and if you hunt private property, you need to have permission. Seems obvious to me, but I'm a property owner who gets trespassed on almost every year, in addition to having the signs that I do put up torn down and vandalized.

I have no sympathy whatsoever for the kind of person who would trespass onto someone's private, residential land and shoot an elk there.