Post by: Ice Cap on January 20, 2011, 05:10:37 PM
If you are on public land and shoot a coyote on private land next to
the public land but you never set foot on said private land are you guilty of trespassing?
My first reaction was to tell him that it would be considered trespassing but after I thought
about it for a bit I couldn't accurately answer his question.
Any thoughts on this?
Post by: singleshot12 on January 20, 2011, 05:18:43 PM
Post by: bobcat on January 20, 2011, 05:19:32 PM
Seriously I think they could get you for trespassing. It could be said that you were in fact hunting on land that you didn't have permission to hunt. Even though you were actually standing on public land.
Wouldn't it be the same thing if you shot an elk that was in a closed GMU while you were standing in a GMU that was open? I guess different in the fact that you could leave the coyote, whereas you'd have to actually cross into the closed area to retrieve the elk.
So I don't know. Chances are you'd never have to deal with the landowner or law enforcement if you shot the coyote and didn't want to retrieve it. But like I said, they could get your BULLET for trespassing. :P
Post by: ICEMAN on January 20, 2011, 05:20:59 PM
I wouldn't do it. His property, his coyote. Why risk getting cited for anything over a dawg?
Edit: bobcat, you beat me to it...
Post by: carpsniperg2 on January 20, 2011, 05:23:17 PM
Post by: singleshot12 on January 20, 2011, 05:25:13 PM
Post by: runamuk on January 20, 2011, 05:25:57 PM
A guy in my office asked me a question today about trespassing.
If you are on public land and shoot a coyote on private land next to
the public land but you never set foot on said private land are you guilty of trespassing?
My first reaction was to tell him that it would be considered trespassing but after I thought
about it for a bit I couldn't accurately answer his question.
Any thoughts on this?
depends on where you are who owns the property and all kinds of scenarios....neighbors of my friend in Idaho shot coyotes on her land in her pasture and she and her dad got pissed and had the guy cited for endangerment or something...probably only a 10 ticket but still it would depend...on circumstances I think
Post by: trotterlg on January 20, 2011, 10:36:52 PM
Post by: jbeaumont21 on January 21, 2011, 12:00:09 AM
Post by: PolarBear on January 21, 2011, 12:17:50 AM
Post by: carpsniperg2 on January 21, 2011, 12:19:28 AM
If you shot the yote on public land and then it ran onto private land you could legally go onto the private land to retreive your kill. You have to leave your weapon behind on the public land though.
:chuckle: You have to first contact a game warden. Then show them the animal was on the public property. Then go from there, you can't just go onto private property. You cannot under any instance trespass. This statement is not accurate. There would be a lot more animals shot on "public ground" that magically got onto private property. I know for a fact that this is not true and have the court paper work to back it up ;) Had a guy tell me the same thing, and tell the warden the same thing when he showed up. Guess what he lost! Doesn't matter were the animal was shot at its about were the animal ends up. Just because it dies on another piece or private property, legally does not give you the right to break the law and trespass.
Post by: Little Dave on January 21, 2011, 01:08:57 AM
If you shot the yote on public land and then it ran onto private land you could legally go onto the private land to retrieve your kill. You have to leave your weapon behind on the public land though.
Not in Washington. It could be that way in another state.
Leave the guns behind if you like, even strip stark naked and hold daisies, if an animal falls on private land the law in this state does not grant you the right to retrieve it without first gaining permission to enter the property. If you cannot negotiate access and you are concerned about the animal wasting, you can request assistance from an game enforcement officer to retrieve the animal for you. I figure it a slow day for them if they have time to help you with a coyote.
Post by: Bean Counter on January 21, 2011, 05:11:37 AM
Post by: Skyvalhunter on January 21, 2011, 05:26:22 AM
Post by: rasbo on January 21, 2011, 05:45:48 AM
Post by: billythekidrock on January 21, 2011, 06:58:48 AM
I am kind of thinking I would just say I shot it on public land and it ran over on the private land to die.......................Game over. Thats my story and I am sticking to it. Has creativity just died or what? Larry
You would be busted when enforcement asks you to show them where it was when you first shot it and they don't find any tracks or blood.
Why be creative in lieing? Be truly creative and make that yote come to you on legal land.
Post by: Special T on January 21, 2011, 07:17:15 AM
Little Dave is correct on the method of retrieval now...
Post by: Gamblin Guy on January 21, 2011, 07:20:36 AM
I am kind of thinking I would just say I shot it on public land and it ran over on the private land to die.......................Game over. Thats my story and I am sticking to it. Has creativity just died or what? Larry
The epitome of the ethical hunter right there…..
Post by: runamuk on January 21, 2011, 07:32:34 AM
If you shot the yote on public land and then it ran onto private land you could legally go onto the private land to retrieve your kill. You have to leave your weapon behind on the public land though.
Not in Washington. It could be that way in another state.
Leave the guns behind if you like, even strip stark naked and hold daisies, if an animal falls on private land the law in this state does not grant you the right to retrieve it without first gaining permission to enter the property. If you cannot negotiate access and you are concerned about the animal wasting, you can request assistance from an game enforcement officer to retrieve the animal for you. I figure it a slow day for them if they have time to help you with a coyote.
that is a great suggestion :chuckle: :chuckle: might get a trip to the looney bin for that :chuckle:
Post by: Special T on January 21, 2011, 07:36:48 AM
Post by: FALFire on January 21, 2011, 09:11:22 AM
I find it amazing that anyone cares about shooting a coyote... I would care less about a Yote even if it was on my property... I might get pissed if it was around my stock, Then i'd be furious... Or if they shot at him skylined or something else stupid... :twocents:
There are farmers over here that will turn in anyone hunting coyotes on their land, they want the coyotes to control the rodent population and they can get real upset if they see you shooting dogs. It sucks but it happens and then you just move along to another location. Ranchers on the other hand, will sometimes welcome coyote hunters if they are having a problem but often times they would rather just handle the problem themselves if they have time.
Post by: TheHunt on January 21, 2011, 09:50:52 AM
So as Rasbo stated... "Game Over"
But shooting it on someone's property is disrespectful and I would consider it against the law as well but I do not have the RCW to quote it.
Post by: VarmintVentilator on January 21, 2011, 10:05:41 AM
Read Trotterlg's quote on page 1 and you'll have your answer. Land owners are not stupid. :DOH:
Post by: h20hunter on January 21, 2011, 11:06:01 AM
Post by: bigpaw 77 on January 21, 2011, 11:13:33 AM
I am kind of thinking I would just say I shot it on public land and it ran over on the private land to die.......................Game over. Thats my story and I am sticking to it. Has creativity just died or what? Larry
"Has creativity died or what" Larry I do not believe that creativity died, but I do belive that good ethics has died. Sounds to me that your just like the guys that shoot deer on my property and then throw them in your truck taken take off before the warden gets to my place.
Post by: jbeaumont21 on January 21, 2011, 12:04:29 PM
If you shot the yote on public land and then it ran onto private land you could legally go onto the private land to retreive your kill. You have to leave your weapon behind on the public land though.
My Bad! Thank you all for pointing that out to me! I guess I need to reread the regs again for the 101th time. It was different where I grew up in Iowa. The laws allowed you to persue game. Seems to me that it would be the right thing to do. I guess there is always a few who ruin it for the rest of us.
From the Iowa Regs...
"The law does not prohibit the unarmed
pursuit of game or furbearing animals lawfully
injured or killed which come to rest on or escape to
the property of another."
Post by: Ice Cap on January 21, 2011, 12:31:21 PM
She said that a good example of trespass is if a company is doing demolition work by blasting.
If any debris from the explosion lands on another persons property, they are technically guilty of trespass.
She assumes that firing a bullet over/onto someones property would be viewed the same way.
Don't get the wrong idea about me as even if it were legal, I do feel that it is unethical.
I just thought it was an interesting question asked by a co-worker!
Post by: trotterlg on January 21, 2011, 01:07:11 PM
Post by: bobcat on January 21, 2011, 01:30:37 PM
You guys are just wound way too tight. This is a Coyote we are talking about, it's not even a game animal. Larry
I think what you posted is what a lot of people were thinking but didn't say. So don't sweat it. What I say on the internet is not always what I would say to someone off the internet. It's kind of like how you tell your kids to do one thing but you do another. The question in the original post could have a lot of variables which could have an affect on how I would answer it. But, the simple answer to the question is that it would be considered trespassing. However I wouldn't say that I would never do such a thing. Maybe other people do follow the law to the letter no matter what, but I'm not quite that perfect, and I can think of at least a couple instances where I have shot coyotes that were on private land, while I was not actually standing on that land.
Post by: VarmintVentilator on January 21, 2011, 03:22:24 PM
Post by: CAMPMEAT on January 21, 2011, 03:33:10 PM
Post by: Straight Shooter on January 21, 2011, 03:38:02 PM
You guys are just wound way too tight. This is a Coyote we are talking about, it's not even a game animal. Larry
Wow, your comments are amazing. What it boils down to is basic integrity and ethics... and having respect for someone else's property. Hopefully, you're not passing on your values to younger hunters. :twocents:
Post by: h20hunter on January 21, 2011, 03:40:26 PM
Post by: gaddy on January 21, 2011, 03:42:36 PM
Post by: runamuk on January 21, 2011, 03:49:06 PM
Post by: Little Dave on January 21, 2011, 04:38:50 PM
You guys are just wound way too tight. This is a Coyote we are talking about, it's not even a game animal. Larry
I'd have to agree about being up tight on this one. It would be great if the situation in our state to mature to a point where we can have the respect of our neighbors and the privilege of law to recover game on private property when needed. I figure one step in making that happen is an improvement in hunter/landowner relations. On the other hand, if people are too casual about stuff like this, even more restrictive laws will be introduced. Could be much worse.
Post by: ribka on January 22, 2011, 10:55:25 AM
I guess I need to put sign every 5 ft in the drive way now :bash: :bash: :bash:
Ran them off then.
Big problem out in the country now people from the city always trying to sneak on our properties to hunt.
Post by: JimmyHoffa on January 22, 2011, 12:01:36 PM
Post by: sakoshooter on January 22, 2011, 06:51:05 PM
I asked because if you shoot a deer(example)on public ground but it runs onto private ground and dies, you need to get the land owners permission to recover your game. If they won't grant permission, you're supposed to call the police and they will supposedly make it work between you and the land owner so you can responsibly recover your animal.
My questions was: Since the land owner has to let you recover your game, what if I shot from public ground onto private, killing a deer. Would the landowner have to let me recover the game. The answer was yes but I'd get a trespassing fine for my actions.
Post by: bowbuild on January 22, 2011, 09:49:42 PM
Interesting, yet "Thehunt" posted exactly the opposite of what you claim. Seems it would be nice to know whether you have legal right to downed animals regardless of being shot on private land legally, or not. I personally feel trespassing, or not, you have claim to the animal as I understand the law as it is.....(I could be wrong.) I see hunting in a legal unit on private land, or not, to be hunting....perfectly legal, trespass has nothing to do with hunting. You can trespass without ever pulling a trigger. Do I believe people should stomp around on others land......No!!, but as the law is now, unless changed recently there is a distinct difference. If a land owner will not give permisson to claim your animal, they should be charged with wastage of game, and it they move or touch it POACHING as there is a party that has TRIED to lay claim to it, as the animal was killed in a open legal unit......to utilize the game animal in anyway would amount to theft....my opinion! Try utilizing a stolen vehicle on your property and see what happens??? ;)
The Cedar river water shed some yrs ago was open to hunting, as far as the game department was concerned.....BUT in large print is said that the city of Seattle inforced trespass. At one time the ticket was quite reasonable for trespass and with the large amount of trophy bulls in the shed it was worth the risk....and many took the chance. Seems rather interesting that the game department for yrs didn't have any contact with the city of seattle water shed.......I think it was almost a dare to hunters........911 changed all that, seems they talk now. :dunno:
Bowbuild
Post by: CastleRocker on January 22, 2011, 09:52:56 PM
Here is my problem with this subject;
Several years ago, my kids were in a hunter's education class up in Chehalis and this subject came up. There were two game wardens and two hunters ed instructors doing the classes. They preached and preached ethics. However, they told the entire class that in a case such as this, a animal CAN be shot on private land, posted or not, as long as the hunter made it from a legal place. This statement made me and several other parents sit up and pay attention. One of us (who shall remain anonymous) actually said "WHAT the hell!?" rather loudly. (Sorry kids). Now that he had EVERYONES undivided attention, he proceeded to tell everyone again about ethics. THEN he clarified his previous statement.
All wild animals in the state of Washington belong to the state. They do not belong to a private landowner although they may live there. So (according to him) it is "legal" to shoot that buck that is feeding in grandma's roses out back as long as the shooter can make the shot far enough from any road, house, etc. HOWEVER, he did stress that it's NOT ethical to do so. Then he told all these little impressionable kids that should this situation arise, they are to call the law immediatly. Do not have any contact with the landowner. Let law enforcement do that. I made the comment that this would not work on my property. I just wish he wouldn't have even told all those kids that. I remember it all too well and it still ticks me off.
So, unless things have changed, this gives all the unethical POS hunters out there the "legal" means they need to come shoot critters on my property. I wish you luck, will surely need it.
Post by: billythekidrock on January 23, 2011, 06:20:15 AM
Aakoshooter,
Interesting, yet "Thehunt" posted exactly the opposite of what you claim. Seems it would be nice to know whether you have legal right to downed animals regardless of being shot on private land legally, or not. I personally feel trespassing, or not, you have claim to the animal as I understand the law as it is.....(I could be wrong.)
The way I understand it is that the shooter must contact enforcement if the landowner won't let you recover your animal. Enforcment then "reminds" the landowner of the wastage laws which, more often then not, changes the landowners mind.
But I could be wrong.
Post by: Bob33 on January 23, 2011, 07:34:43 AM
Post by: ICEMAN on January 23, 2011, 11:41:47 AM
Aakoshooter,
Interesting, yet "Thehunt" posted exactly the opposite of what you claim. Seems it would be nice to know whether you have legal right to downed animals regardless of being shot on private land legally, or not. I personally feel trespassing, or not, you have claim to the animal as I understand the law as it is.....(I could be wrong.)
The way I understand it is that the shooter must contact enforcement if the landowner won't let you recover your animal. Enforcment then "reminds" the landowner of the wastage laws which, more often then not, changes the landowners mind.
But I could be wrong.
This is how I was told it works aswell....
Post by: FALFire on January 23, 2011, 12:47:43 PM
There is nothing in state law that requires a land owner to allow anyone onto their property unless perhaps it was a human life threatening event and those defenses outlined under RCW.9A.52.090.
Just because a hunter shoots an animal from public land and it dies on private land is no exception, regardless of the " Wasting of Game Meat" laws. It is the hunters responsibility to contact all involved parties and request permission to access the land to retrieve said game animal. If you are met with refusal then of course the proper authorities should be contacted. However, there is nothing the LEO can do to FORCE the landowner to "Give up" the goods even though the threats of violating state law of Waste of Fish and Wildlife RCW 77.15.170 is made, the landowner is still under no obligation to allow the hunter onto the land. If the LEO speaks with a silver tongue, then perhaps the LEO can take possession of the animal and turn it over to the awaiting hunter(s) and all is well. A Law Enforcement Officer cannot make up the rules as the day goes on, they can only uphold the law as written and allow the courts to settle the issue.
If you are hunting on public land and you shoot an animal on private land you are subject to the State trespassing laws, regardless if you actually step foot onto the private ground. You, as a hunter are responsible for your projectile regardless of where it falls. Be responsible and no worries, be stupid and face the consequences.
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=9A.52.080 (http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=9A.52.080)
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=9A.52.09 (http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=9A.52.09)
Post by: Caseyd on January 23, 2011, 12:58:59 PM
I find it amazing that anyone cares about shooting a coyote... I would care less about a Yote even if it was on my property... I might get pissed if it was around my stock, Then i'd be furious... Or if they shot at him skylined or something else stupid... :twocents:
There are farmers over here that will turn in anyone hunting coyotes on their land, they want the coyotes to control the rodent population and they can get real upset if they see you shooting dogs. It sucks but it happens and then you just move along to another location. Ranchers on the other hand, will sometimes welcome coyote hunters if they are having a problem but often times they would rather just handle the problem themselves if they have time.
:yeah:
My grandpas the same way. Certain pieces we cant yote hunt cause the rodents.
Post by: bowbuild on January 23, 2011, 02:08:16 PM
I think you are wrong, once a land owner has been contacted he CAN refuse to allow any access to his land, but at that point clearly under wastage of game RCW 77.15.170 he assumes ownership of the animal because of his rufusal to grant access...for the owner to let then animal rot is clearly against the law, to do ANYTHING to the animal including tagging it himself, is a clear choice that could in my reading of the RCW"s end the land owner in hot water.
People in my opinion get emotionally charged when it comes to this issue (understandably) but just because you own a land tract DOES not afford you the ability to claim ownership of STATE OWNED ANIMALS.
PLEASE, understand I am not looking to undermind the ablity of a owner to protect his land from unwanted intrusion that is a fundimental right I believe.
I again would refer back to a abandoned vehicle on ones land, just because it is there does not mean without a legal documentation from a officer give a landowner any rights to the vehicle.......Infact if a officer feels there is any relation to a crime he has every right to persue a vehicle and now that I think about it, maybe even a animal as it WAS part of a crime. Once a "CRIME" has been commited and the animal and land are involved that would give officers the RIGHT to any evidence related to said crime.......Trespassing! The removal of the game animal could be EASILY link to evidence hence removal of the animal is now not a CHOICE of the owner, but of the officer!
Once a officer has confronted a owner , and is met with refusal there is a crime being commited, and a officer has the right to collect any evidence that is related to a crime...including wastage of game!
Post by: JimmyHoffa on January 23, 2011, 02:32:16 PM
Post by: FALFire on January 23, 2011, 03:14:06 PM
You would be correct to say that if the taking of an animal on private property were a crime, then indeed, the LEO would in fact be responsible for taking such animal for evidence to support the criminal charges against the suspect. No problem there whatsoever. However, there is no such law requiring the land owner to give up the animal to the hunter, which in this case would be a 'Suspect in the crime".
The charging of wasting fish or game meat would be a stretch for this State unless the State could prove the actor willfully intended to let the meat rot as you say, I'm certain most folks would simply say "Don't let this happen again".
If the LEO wishes to resolve the incident without the assistance of the property owner then the LEO could simply turn the animal/evidence over to the hunter and be done with it. Basically....No victim, No crime. The land owner does not own the animals on his/her ground, they belong to the state unless there is a license to raise and or nurture said animal, ie: game farm, etc.
Got to run, hunting time.
Post by: 700xcr on January 23, 2011, 05:05:36 PM
A guy in my office asked me a question today about trespassing.Not along with trespassing charge. They might also get reckless endangerment charges too. For the simple fact that anybody that shoots an animal on my property even though they are not on my property may hit one of my animals. It is best before shooting an animal on somebodies property is get permission. Or else they may get shot themself. :twocents:
If you are on public land and shoot a coyote on private land next to
the public land but you never set foot on said private land are you guilty of trespassing?
My first reaction was to tell him that it would be considered trespassing but after I thought
about it for a bit I couldn't accurately answer his question.
Any thoughts on this?
Post by: Bob33 on January 23, 2011, 05:27:58 PM
Another point they often make - be prepared to answer the question "what were you doing shooting an animal so close to private land?" The hunter has some responsibility to ensure that whatever he shoots can be legally retrieved. Of course, a deer can run a mile or a duck can fly 500 yards and land in someone's yard, but if you shoot a deer 20 feet away from private land and it jumps the fence and dies 10 feet inside, you're not as likely to get much friendly assistance from the officer. Most will try to help retrieve the animal, but as pointed out if it is private land, the landowner has the final say.
Post by: FALFire on January 23, 2011, 07:13:50 PM
A guy in my office asked me a question today about trespassing.Not along with trespassing charge. They might also get reckless endangerment charges too. For the simple fact that anybody that shoots an animal on my property even though they are not on my property may hit one of my animals. It is best before shooting an animal on somebodies property is get permission. Or else they may get shot themself. :twocents:
If you are on public land and shoot a coyote on private land next to
the public land but you never set foot on said private land are you guilty of trespassing?
My first reaction was to tell him that it would be considered trespassing but after I thought
about it for a bit I couldn't accurately answer his question.
Any thoughts on this?
Problem with that is that Reckless Endangerment does not apply to animals or other property, it only applies to persons, people, human beings. If someone were to shoot at a deer for example and the bullet hit and killed a steer then the crime would be malicious mischief and that is not a shootable offense. You can simply take them to civil court and sue for restitution instead of spending years in prison for murder or manslaughter. Even though your prized Bessie is no longer with you, shooting someone for a property crime is not taken lightly in this state.
Post by: 700xcr on January 23, 2011, 07:44:26 PM
Not along with trespassing charge. They might also get reckless endangerment charges too. For the simple fact that anybody that shoots an animal on my property even though they are not on my property may hit one of my animals. It is best before shooting an animal on somebodies property is get permission. Or else they may get shot themself. :twocents:
Problem with that is that Reckless Endangerment does not apply to animals or other property, it only applies to persons, people, human beings. If someone were to shoot at a deer for example and the bullet hit and killed a steer then the crime would be malicious mischief and that is not a shootable offense. You can simply take them to civil court and sue for restitution instead of spending years in prison for murder or manslaughter. Even though your prized Bessie is no longer with you, shooting someone for a property crime is not taken lightly in this state.
[/quote]My animals are a part of my family. Like I said reckless endangerment and if I am out with my animals a some body shooting at an animal on my property is going to have return gun fire no matter if they are shooting a coyote to a gopheror whatever. If they want to hunt on and take shoot that is on my property better in (Beep) check with me first.
Post by: FALFire on January 23, 2011, 07:51:19 PM
My animals are a part of my family. Like I said reckless endangerment and if I am out with my animals a some body shooting at an animal on my property is going to have return gun fire no matter if they are shooting a coyote to a gopheror whatever. If they want to hunt on and take shoot that is on my property better in (Beep) check with me first.Not along with trespassing charge. They might also get reckless endangerment charges too. For the simple fact that anybody that shoots an animal on my property even though they are not on my property may hit one of my animals. It is best before shooting an animal on somebodies property is get permission. Or else they may get shot themself. :twocents:
Problem with that is that Reckless Endangerment does not apply to animals or other property, it only applies to persons, people, human beings. If someone were to shoot at a deer for example and the bullet hit and killed a steer then the crime would be malicious mischief and that is not a shootable offense. You can simply take them to civil court and sue for restitution instead of spending years in prison for murder or manslaughter. Even though your prized Bessie is no longer with you, shooting someone for a property crime is not taken lightly in this state.
[/quote]
OKAAAAAY THEN, You told me! But the law dosen't look at it that way.
Post by: Special T on January 23, 2011, 10:21:58 PM
I know of small tracks of public land that have no/little public acess... Because of their small nature something like this is quite possible. How is 500 ft MORE ethical than 20 ft? It may eliminate some headache but if you property is adjacent to public land you run that risk... In either case i am on land and not trespassing...If a game warden or any one else asked why i shot one within 20yrds of private land my response would be " Its public land and that is where the deer where." How is it any different than hunting on 5 acres of private land? You stick a deer and it falls on the neighbors property? Is it unethical for you to stick a deer with a bow because you only own 5 acres? What if it was 10? Or only 2?
Post by: Bob33 on January 23, 2011, 10:30:08 PM
I think the point is that a hunter should consider retrieval before shooting. If you're duck hunting and shoot a duck over water, you should have a plan to retrieve it before shooting, right? I think the same applies to big game. You know an animal can easily run 50 feet after being shot. It's not illegal to shoot one very close to a boundary, but shouldn't you consider the possibly that it might not be retrievable if you do?
It's just something to consider: what happens "if"?
Post by: ribka on January 23, 2011, 10:52:48 PM
Do not shoot game, even yotes, on posted property and when you shoot game and it travels to private property have the common sense to contact land owner before pursuing game.
Land owners on the E side help protect animals. A lot more animals would be poached without landowner protection :twocents:
The neighbors and I help a lot of elk and deer every year and really help cut down on the illegal harvest :twocents:
Post by: carpsniperg2 on January 23, 2011, 11:38:55 PM