Hunting Washington Forum

Big Game Hunting => Deer Hunting => Topic started by: New England Native on October 27, 2010, 04:18:29 PM

Title: legal question
Post by: New England Native on October 27, 2010, 04:18:29 PM: I was duck hunting today and long story short my dog and I ran into a 2pt buck. In fact my lab was nose to nose with it wish I had a pic it was pretty cool. I had not filled my tag so my immediate instinct was pull up my gun. then quickly put it down. 1, I was not wearing orange. 2, I only had faststeel on me. Now my question is if I had everything else, could I still get in trouble for my dog being with me?
Title: Re: legal question
Post by: jackelope on October 27, 2010, 04:21:13 PM: I would say yes.
But I'm no pro.
Title: Re: legal question
Post by: MtnMuley on October 27, 2010, 04:24:19 PM: Depends on the warden. There will be a big debate on what's legal here. I say shoot the buck (pending you have orange, license, and correct shot). Honesty is the best role to follow. Tell him the truth. That's me though. We've taken many of bucks in the Pullman area back in the day pheasant hunting with dogs, and none of them were ever shot by the aid of dogs.
Title: Re: legal question
Post by: coachcw on October 29, 2010, 06:32:44 AM: I think the law says the use or aid of dogs . if he was just sitting there and not tracking deer you might be ok , shoot the buck take the dog to the truck . maybe he's still hanging out I'd head back there and see if i could find him.
Title: Re: legal question
Post by: bullrider97 on October 29, 2010, 06:38:07 AM: I agree, depends on the warden :dunno:. My family is in law enforcement and there can be a huge difference in response, depending on which officer (warden) you talk to. Not your fault that the dog was legitimately with you, but the burden of proof would be on you to show the dog was not aiding you to shoot the deer.

If everything else was right (orange etc.) let him have it :twocents:.
Title: Re: legal question
Post by: patton1 on October 29, 2010, 08:03:00 AM: My lab used to go with me during rifle season in MI. Same rules apply there. I was NOT using him to hunt. He would just sit next to me in the blind and walk next to me if I was roaming around. I got him an orange vest to wear while we were out. I loved having him with me because when it was time to leave I would say "find the truck" and he would always lead me out of the woods right to the truck. I always new where I was going but it was nice to know that if got lost or something that my favorite hunting buddy was right there to help. I always wondered what a game warden would do if they saw me with him but in my opinion I wasn't doing anything illegal or unethical so it was worth the risk. I haven't taken him since I've been out here and sometimes I think he's pissed at me for it. I definately think you did the right thing though and I have to say koodos to you for that.
Title: Re: legal question
Post by: Fish4Fun on October 29, 2010, 10:55:17 AM: I think you did the right thing, No Orange and you didn't meet the weapons criteria either. Which says you would have needed slugs or buckshot for big game. Now that you know where the buck is, just go back and get him.
Title: Re: legal question
Post by: Bob33 on October 29, 2010, 11:04:02 AM: It is probably best not to shoot in that case.

RCW 77.15.240
Unlawful use of dogs -- Public nuisance -- Penalty.
(1) A person is guilty of unlawful use of dogs if the person:

(a) Negligently fails to prevent a dog under the person's control from pursuing or injuring deer, elk, or an animal classified as endangered under this title;

(b) Uses the dog to hunt deer or elk; or

(c) During the closed season for a species of game animal or game bird, negligently fails to prevent the dog from pursuing such animal or destroying the nest of a game bird.

(2) Unlawful use of dogs is a misdemeanor. A dog that is the basis for a violation of this section may be declared a public nuisance.
Title: Re: legal question
Post by: STIKNSTRINGBOW on October 29, 2010, 12:07:32 PM: I would say that if the dog is with you, then you would be in violation no matter what the intent. :twocents:
It does not matter whether the dog is aiding you or not, that is not up to the LEO to determine,
Having the dog with you would be enough to receive a citation,
in the pamphlet.....
9. Using dogs:
• Hunting wild animals with dogs during
any deer or elk modern firearm season is
prohibited.
• Allowing a dog, owned or controlled by
you, to pursue or injure deer or elk or to
accompany you while you are hunting
deer or elk is prohibited.•
Hunting or pursuing any big game animal,
bobcat, or coyote with dogs is prohibited,
except cougar hunting as permitted by the
Fish and Wildlife Commission.
Title: Re: legal question
Post by: bobcat on October 29, 2010, 12:14:07 PM: It's a BS law but I think stiknstringbow is correct.
Title: Re: legal question
Post by: remington300mag on October 29, 2010, 12:17:25 PM: Well what about a "seeing eye dog"?!?!?! :chuckle: :lol4:
Title: Re: legal question
Post by: charlesbearden1 on October 29, 2010, 12:47:34 PM: carry slugs and orange next time! You weren't using the dog for deer just a coincedence, You cannot use dogs for deer but.... hey, I would have taken it if i were wearing orange.
Title: Re: legal question
Post by: Bofire on October 29, 2010, 12:51:26 PM: :)You cannot even use a dog to track a wounded animal. dumb law but stickinstringbow nailed it. in my opinion you would have broken the law even if you ahd orange and slugs.
Carl
Title: Re: legal question
Post by: STIKNSTRINGBOW on October 29, 2010, 03:16:48 PM: NO QUESTION ABOUT IT, as it states in pamphlet...

• Allowing a dog, owned or controlled by
you, to pursue or injure deer or elk or to
accompany you while you are hunting
deer or elk is prohibited.

If you harvested it, you would have been in violation.
Title: Re: legal question
Post by: patton1 on October 29, 2010, 06:26:45 PM: STUPID LAW in any state! My dog can't sit with me while I'm hunting or help track a deer so it doesn't go to waste, but he can chase other animals up a tree so I can walk up and shoot them out of it. I try my hardest to always follow the rules set forth for hunting but sometimes I would just like to say f it. Excuse my French.
Title: Re: legal question
Post by: STIKNSTRINGBOW on October 29, 2010, 06:35:23 PM: You must understand that laws like this are not for the rule followers, but for the rule breakers, give a cheater an excuse and they will use it.
Title: Re: legal question
Post by: patton1 on October 29, 2010, 07:02:33 PM: Quote from: STIKNSTRINGBOW on October 29, 2010, 06:35:23 PM
You must understand that laws like this are not for the rule followers, but for the rule breakers, give a cheater an excuse and they will use it.
I try and understand and I do follow the rules but it just seems like there are more and more laws and rules every year. At what point do we say enough is enough? If I'm hunting ethically, but it can be TAKEN as breaking the law, am I really in the wrong?
Title: Re: legal question
Post by: Shootmoore on October 29, 2010, 07:12:47 PM: Quote from: patton1 on October 29, 2010, 07:02:33 PM
Quote from: STIKNSTRINGBOW on October 29, 2010, 06:35:23 PM
You must understand that laws like this are not for the rule followers, but for the rule breakers, give a cheater an excuse and they will use it.
I try and understand and I do follow the rules but it just seems like there are more and more laws and rules every year. At what point do we say enough is enough? If I'm hunting ethically, but it can be TAKEN as breaking the law, am I really in the wrong?

Only when LE gets better at ESP. Words or actions has to do until the ESP skills improve. Its why we lost the ability to use dogs for yotes. Guys were using the excuse they were running coyotes when contacted by Gamey's in the woods with there dogs. Even knowing good and well they were running bear and cougs or coons out of season. Plausable denial gave us another law.

Unfortionatly as the liberal courts take any bs excuse they can to let the criminal go, the legislatior plays catch up trying to cover the bases. This is not always the case on all the laws but it is a reason why some are added.

15 years ago a DUI took about 30-45 min and 2 pages. Now its 5-7 pages 2 hours on top of the written report.

Shootmoore