Post by: muzbuster on October 24, 2012, 01:15:36 PM
http://www.petersenshunting.com/2012/10/24/washington-poachers-arrested-win-repeat-moron-award/ (http://www.petersenshunting.com/2012/10/24/washington-poachers-arrested-win-repeat-moron-award/)
Post by: HUNTINCOUPLE on October 24, 2012, 01:21:31 PM
Post by: CedarPants on October 24, 2012, 01:36:57 PM
Post by: robescc on October 24, 2012, 01:41:25 PM
I would have liked to have seen that article provide specific examples of people in Washington being found guilty of poaching while trespassing and walking away with nothing other than a $250 fine and being allowed to keep the animal.I too find that strange. I do not believe that is the case but I have been wrong before.
Post by: bobcat on October 24, 2012, 02:16:43 PM
I would have liked to have seen that article provide specific examples of people in Washington being found guilty of poaching while trespassing and walking away with nothing other than a $250 fine and being allowed to keep the animal.
See, they weren't found guilty of poaching, only trespassing. If they were hunting during the season and following all the other hunting regulations, then it was simply a trespass charge.
Post by: rosscrazyelk on October 24, 2012, 02:17:54 PM
Post by: cem3434 on October 24, 2012, 07:52:48 PM
So I am thinking cascadia?:yeah: There are quite a few bulls running around in that area. The only other areas I can think of in Pierce County would be off 200th in Graham or around 304th & Meridian. The locals watch all of those areas pretty closely, so it could have been in one of those areas as well.
Post by: highside74 on October 24, 2012, 09:44:07 PM
So I am thinking cascadia?:yeah: There are quite a few bulls running around in that area. The only other areas I can think of in Pierce County would be off 200th in Graham or around 304th & Meridian. The locals watch all of those areas pretty closely, so it could have been in one of those areas as well.
It said east pierce...200th and 304th aren't east pierce. I was thinking Cascadia also because it said they were sneaking them out.
Post by: Chappyk16 on October 25, 2012, 12:24:00 PM
Post by: erk444 on October 25, 2012, 06:00:37 PM
Post by: JBar on October 25, 2012, 06:13:35 PM
Post by: GUscottie on October 25, 2012, 06:16:44 PM
Post by: woodman on October 25, 2012, 06:50:46 PM
I would have liked to have seen that article provide specific examples of people in Washington being found guilty of poaching while trespassing and walking away with nothing other than a $250 fine and being allowed to keep the animal.
See, they weren't found guilty of poaching, only trespassing. If they were hunting during the season and following all the other hunting regulations, then it was simply a trespass charge.
This is not true anymore if they don't have permission, the law has been changed.
Post by: BOWHUNTER45 on October 25, 2012, 07:03:52 PM
Post by: dbor on October 25, 2012, 07:08:39 PM
Post by: bobcat on October 25, 2012, 07:33:25 PM
I would have liked to have seen that article provide specific examples of people in Washington being found guilty of poaching while trespassing and walking away with nothing other than a $250 fine and being allowed to keep the animal.
See, they weren't found guilty of poaching, only trespassing. If they were hunting during the season and following all the other hunting regulations, then it was simply a trespass charge.
This is not true anymore if they don't have permission, the law has been changed.
I realize the law has changed, but my reply was to Cedar Pants, in reference to people who had been cited for trespassing and still allowed to keep the animal they killed.
Post by: woodman on October 26, 2012, 09:02:36 AM
I would have liked to have seen that article provide specific examples of people in Washington being found guilty of poaching while trespassing and walking away with nothing other than a $250 fine and being allowed to keep the animal.
See, they weren't found guilty of poaching, only trespassing. If they were hunting during the season and following all the other hunting regulations, then it was simply a trespass charge.
This is not true anymore if they don't have permission, the law has been changed.
I realize the law has changed, but my reply was to Cedar Pants, in reference to people who had been cited for trespassing and still allowed to keep the animal they killed.
bobcat, I spent several hours with a game warden recently and he told me that they don't take the animals on these type of situations anymore. They would be in trouble if the person cited got off and the animal was gone. He also told me that even if a person did not shoot an animal and was trespassing while hunting, the hunter would face the same penalty as if they had shot an animal. It seems as if they really have some bite in this type of stuff. I actually saw him arrest someone on this type of infraction and he meant business in a very serious way.