Post by: Cougeyes on October 28, 2013, 12:32:23 PM
http://nwsportsmanmag.com/editors-blog/33-charges-filed-against-tribal-man-in-okanogan-trophy-buck-poaching-case-atty-says-client-not-guilty/ (http://nwsportsmanmag.com/editors-blog/33-charges-filed-against-tribal-man-in-okanogan-trophy-buck-poaching-case-atty-says-client-not-guilty/)
Post by: vandeman17 on October 28, 2013, 12:53:36 PM
Post by: Rainier10 on October 28, 2013, 01:08:05 PM
Post by: deltaops on October 28, 2013, 01:17:06 PM
Post by: cryfowl on October 28, 2013, 01:27:35 PM
Post by: grundy53 on October 28, 2013, 02:27:19 PM
sent from my typewriter
Post by: mulehunter on October 28, 2013, 02:46:11 PM
Post by: Curly on October 28, 2013, 02:50:00 PM
Post by: combs338 on October 28, 2013, 02:59:27 PM
This guy is a disgrace to his tribe and to all ethical hunters. He should be locked up for a long time. :bash: Sickening.
:yeah:
Post by: JJB11B on October 28, 2013, 03:04:43 PM
Post by: j_h_nimrod on October 28, 2013, 03:19:50 PM
Post by: 6x6in6 on October 28, 2013, 03:56:16 PM
Of course it will go the direction of tribal privilege, otherwise there is absolutely no defense, although not much with.Charged on 33 counts in Okanagon Superior Court, not tribal court.
Tribal "privilege" should not play a part in this. Like I said, should..... :rolleyes:
Post by: snowpack on October 28, 2013, 04:13:01 PM
Post by: JJB11B on October 28, 2013, 04:21:16 PM
Post by: BOWHUNTER45 on October 28, 2013, 04:34:57 PM
Post by: cmiller85 on October 28, 2013, 04:37:41 PM
Sure as heII hope they dont. Throw the proverbial book at em! :violent1:
And then hang him with the literal rope! :chuckle:
Post by: _TONY_ on October 28, 2013, 04:42:06 PM
Post by: AlpineMuley on October 28, 2013, 05:12:40 PM
Post by: JJB11B on October 28, 2013, 05:14:10 PM
:yeah:Sure as heII hope they dont. Throw the proverbial book at em! :violent1:
And then hang him with the literal rope! :chuckle:
Post by: JJB11B on October 28, 2013, 05:15:19 PM
Well ..they picked the perfect photo of the dipsheet ///DAMN I AM GOOD !! Yep ...you are real good :rolleyes: :bash:good and CENSORed!!!
Post by: Jack Diamond on October 28, 2013, 05:36:27 PM
Post by: ellensburgpo on October 28, 2013, 05:45:42 PM
2 poaching , waste of wildlife cases In the last week. Can't help but wonder if enforcement is ramping up, after the release of UC Wardens book, especially this case. :dunno:
Or it's modern hunting season so there's more going on, it's insane how busy they are in the clockum every year. Could be both though, who knows.
Post by: MeatMaster on October 28, 2013, 07:09:35 PM
I'm surprised they filed charges...:yeah:
sent from my typewriter
Post by: go4steelhd on October 28, 2013, 07:30:38 PM
Post by: mdbuck5x5 on October 28, 2013, 07:38:18 PM
Post by: Expedition Scout on October 28, 2013, 08:10:19 PM
After this civil action penalty is applied, the state can take an additional restitution penalty based on the formula, ((gross score – 100)˛ x $1.65)." Illegally shoot a 180-inch buck in Ohio will cost you $10,560 plus court costs, fines, and whatever the first restitution fee was that was assessed by the wildlife agency. That puts a whole new light on "cheap thrills."
Post by: bobcat on October 28, 2013, 08:18:20 PM
WA should start to charge a fee by the inch of antler like other states for poaching. At least with an increase price tag attached to trophy animals, it might curb the cases of it happening.
After this civil action penalty is applied, the state can take an additional restitution penalty based on the formula, ((gross score – 100)˛ x $1.65)." Illegally shoot a 180-inch buck in Ohio will cost you $10,560 plus court costs, fines, and whatever the first restitution fee was that was assessed by the wildlife agency. That puts a whole new light on "cheap thrills."
Washington state does have an additional fine for "trophy" deer and elk. From page 75 of the 2013 Hunting regulations:
Quote
Criminal Wildlife Penalty Assessment
In addition to criminal penalties, courts assess
a criminal wildlife penalty for conviction of
illegally killing or possessing: deer, elk, bear, or
cougar - $2,000; moose, antelope, bighorn sheep,
or mountain goat - $4,000; trophy deer (four or
more antler points on both sides, not including
eye guards), or elk (five or more antler points on
both sides, not including eye guards) - $6,000;
and mountain caribou, grizzly bear, or trophy
mountain sheep (3/4 curl or better) - $12,000.
Post by: Skyvalhunter on October 28, 2013, 08:26:33 PM
Post by: JJB11B on October 28, 2013, 08:27:53 PM
Post by: MLBowhunting on October 28, 2013, 08:28:44 PM
Post by: hambone on October 28, 2013, 08:47:19 PM
Post by: buck man on October 28, 2013, 09:33:47 PM
Post by: FLIZZ on October 28, 2013, 09:41:53 PM
Post by: coachcw on October 28, 2013, 09:46:46 PM
Post by: HUNTNORTHWEST on October 28, 2013, 09:56:53 PM
Post by: SemperFidelis97 on October 28, 2013, 09:59:21 PM
Post by: irishevox on October 29, 2013, 12:19:42 AM
Post by: blindpig on October 29, 2013, 05:38:33 AM
Post by: Skyvalhunter on October 29, 2013, 05:41:10 AM
Post by: BOWHUNTER45 on October 29, 2013, 06:38:49 AM
He will get off! Hide and watch! :bash::yeah:
Post by: LndShrk on October 29, 2013, 06:48:49 AM
I believe it is a felony if you commit more three, or more major game violations at the same time. I could be wrong I am sure there is someone on here that could enlighten us.
:yeah:
Quote from: RCW
RCW 77.15.410
Unlawful hunting of big game — Penalty.
(1) A person is guilty of unlawful hunting of big game in the second degree if the person:
(a) Hunts for, takes, or possesses big game and the person does not have and possess all licenses, tags, or permits required under this title; or
(b) Violates any department rule regarding seasons, bag or possession limits, closed areas including game reserves, closed times, or any other rule governing the hunting, taking, or possession of big game.
(2) A person is guilty of unlawful hunting of big game in the first degree if the person commits the act described in subsection (1) of this section and:
(a) The person hunts for, takes, or possesses three or more big game animals within the same course of events; or
(b) The act occurs within five years of the date of a prior conviction under this title involving unlawful hunting, killing, possessing, or taking big game.
(3)(a) Unlawful hunting of big game in the second degree is a gross misdemeanor. Upon conviction of an offense involving killing or possession of big game taken during a closed season, closed area, without the proper license, tag, or permit using an unlawful method, or in excess of the bag or possession limit, the department shall revoke all of the person's hunting licenses and tags and order a suspension of the person's hunting privileges for two years.
(b) Unlawful hunting of big game in the first degree is a class C felony. Upon conviction, the department shall revoke all of the person's hunting licenses or tags and order the person's hunting privileges suspended for ten years.
(4) For the purposes of this section, "same course of events" means within one twenty-four hour period, or a pattern of conduct composed of a series of acts that are unlawful under subsection (1) of this section, over a period of time evidencing a continuity of purpose.
[2012 c 176 § 26; 2011 c 133 § 1; 2005 c 406 § 4; 1999 c 258 § 3; 1998 c 190 § 10.]
Post by: kodiak 907 on October 29, 2013, 07:43:45 AM
Post by: DeArBuCK4me on October 29, 2013, 11:00:34 AM
Post by: scottr on October 29, 2013, 02:52:54 PM
Quote
One, from September, was bragged up as killed with a 400-yard shot, which means with a rifle, and problematic because according to officers, the man wasn’t allowed to have firearms because of a prior domestic violence conviction.
what about this? this is a federal charge.
http://www.justice.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title9/crm01117.htm (http://www.justice.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title9/crm01117.htm)
Quote
1117
Restrictions on the Possession of Firearms by Individuals Convicted of a Misdemeanor Crime of Domestic Violence
The following is the full text of an announcement that was sent by the Criminal Division to the United States Attorneys' Offices upon the passage of Title 18, United States Code, Section 922(g)(9) (the Lautenberg Amendment) in the fall of 1996. This provision amends the Federal Gun Control Act of 1968 by banning the possession of firearms by individuals convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence.
GUN BAN FOR INDIVIDUALS CONVICTED OF A MISDEMEANOR CRIME OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE -- 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(9)
The 1968 Gun Control Act and subsequent amendments codified at 18 U.S.C. § 921 et seq. prohibit anyone convicted of a felony and anyone subject to a domestic violence protective order from possessing a firearm. The intended effect of this new legislation is to extend the firearms ban to anyone convicted of a "misdemeanor crime of domestic violence."
Post by: bigtex on October 29, 2013, 02:57:13 PM
I happen to work in the court system and see these type (not this bad) cases. I have never seen anyone get jail time. They get fined and that's it. Most of these idiots pay on an interest free fine, which ends up going to collections over time. There really is no penalty for these folks.
VERY rare to see any type of jail time, heck even community service for fish and wildlife violations.
Post by: scottr on October 29, 2013, 03:03:52 PM
Quote
In return, the state has agreed to notify the tribe when Fish and Wildlife officers plan to investigate cases on the Colville Indian Reservation. And, state Wildlife officers who catch tribal members violating one of six safety rules in an area known as the North Half will refer those cases to tribal officials instead of making an arrest or issuing a citation.
http://www.wenatcheeworld.com/news/2012/mar/01/colvilles-reach-agreement-with-state-over-hunting/ (http://www.wenatcheeworld.com/news/2012/mar/01/colvilles-reach-agreement-with-state-over-hunting/)