Post by: pianoman9701 on February 09, 2012, 08:51:22 AM
"Dear Sirs/Madams,
With reference to:
WAC 232-12-063 Hunting at night--Regulations--Penalties
"...(c) Firearms are restricted to .22 caliber rifles and
handguns, and shotguns are restricted to no. 6 shot or smaller. Hunting with bow and arrow is allowed..."
This restriction basically says that law abiding citizens who are legally hunting game at night will be put at a disadvantage by being forced to use lower caliber firearms so it's easier for law enforcement to identify criminals. This is a bad proposal and should be scrapped. The reasoning for this has no basis in reality.
A poacher basically must be caught in the act of shooting an animal (or decoy) to be successfully prosecuted. Because it's not illegal to possess any caliber of loaded weapon at any time while in the woods, a law breaker must be caught doing the illegal deed. This makes it unnecessary to restrict the rest of us law-abiding citizens from being able to use a larger caliber firearm for legally hunting animals at night.
Please eliminate this restriction from the proposed game laws. Penalizing the legal hunters to make it easier to bust poachers makes no sense, especially when it really doesn't make it any easier to prosecute them.
Thanks for your attention to my request and comments.
Most Sincerely,
John W
Vancouver, WA "
Post by: buglebuster on February 09, 2012, 08:55:16 AM
Post by: Machias on February 09, 2012, 02:00:05 PM
Lori Preuss, WSBA #33045
WDFW Criminal Justice Liaison &
Administrative Regulations Coordinator
Lori.preuss@dfw.wa.gov
360.902.2930
Fax 360.902.2155
Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2012 1:38 PM
To: Preuss, Lori (DFW)
Subject: Night Hunting Changes
Afternoon Mrs. Preuss,
I saw your signature and name on the hunting proposals paperwork, so I am hoping you can give me an idea on the thinking behind the night hunting proposals. Specifically the shot size #6 and smaller requirement. Could you shed some light on the reasoning behind this restriction? If this stands basically you will eliminate shotguns for use on coyotes at night as #6 shot and smaller is completely unethical to use on coyotes, daytime or nighttime. Also, am I reading the proposal correctly, .22 weapons means .222, .223 and .22-250s are legal, but .17, .204, .243 and .257s would be illegal? Can you also shed the thoughts on that reasoning? Thanks!!
Fred
Post by: pianoman9701 on February 09, 2012, 02:01:10 PM
Post by: Bob33 on February 09, 2012, 02:29:37 PM
Post by: Machias on February 09, 2012, 02:47:59 PM
It will be interesting to see the response. I believe it's due to the proposed change that would allow night hunting during September, October, and November when modern deer seasons are open. It appears to have not been completely thought through, however.
I have a feeling that part is a typo. What would be the reasoning to allow folks to hunt coyotes at night during an open deer or elk season....unless you wanted to seriously tick off all the deer and elk hunters and garner their support for shutting down all of night hunting. That makes no sense at all. I love hunting yotes at night, but would never want to do it in an area where folks are camping and or deer and elk hunting the next day. Makes no sense at all.
Post by: bobcat on February 09, 2012, 02:52:06 PM
Post by: Bob33 on February 09, 2012, 02:55:07 PM
It appears to not be well thought through. I do think they intended to allow night huntng during Sep-Nov. Just don't know why.
Post by: bobcat on February 09, 2012, 02:58:54 PM
:dunno:
It appears to not be well thought through. I do think they intended to allow night huntng during Sep-Nov. Just don't know why.
Why would they be trying to give us something we DON'T want (night hunting Sept-Nov), and taking away
something else that we DO want(our choice of caliber and shot size)? ???
Post by: Bob33 on February 09, 2012, 03:03:15 PM
Post by: bobcat on February 09, 2012, 03:06:48 PM
hopefully Fred will get a response that lets us know.
Yeah, sorry, I wasn't expecting an answer to those questions. :)
I can't wait to see what they come up with. I really think it has more to do with safety than anything else. That's what they were concerned with a year or so ago when they first started talking about changing the night hunting rules.
Post by: Curly on February 09, 2012, 03:47:55 PM
I predict an end to night hunting within the next 10 years........ :(
Post by: lokidog on February 09, 2012, 10:13:08 PM
Post by: spookgus on February 09, 2012, 10:38:17 PM
Post by: Outdoor Guardian on February 15, 2012, 07:09:49 AM
BACKGROUND: Prior to the codification of former fish and wildlife codes (Title 75&77), the prohibition against spotlighting big game was much stronger. The former law maintained that if a person was in possession of a firearm, in an area where big game was found, and artificial light was used, the combination of those elements constituted “prima facia” evidence of spotlighting. While the prima facia language is now absent from RCW 77.15.450, officers essentially use the same standard today to articulate an investigatory stop, if not probable cause. Right now, hunting small game species such as raccoon, coyote and bobcat with the aid of spotlight is not prohibited, except during times areas are open for center fire big game seasons. This convolutes things for us when we approach spotlighting during those other months (e.g. “am I going to tick off a legit hunter, or is this a bad guy?").
While the enforceability challenge is usually overcome by evaluating a number of factors, to include whether the habitat being hunted and methods being employed are consistent with hunting small game species, it gives the poachers an argument. I was on patrol two years ago when we set up the decoy. A known poacher shot the decoy from a seated position in the vehicle, with the bullet traveling across the chest of his partner, and out of the open passenger side window. When we pulled him over and took him out of the vehicle, he was arguing that he shot at a coyote. Yeah – that’s the extreme, but the “I’m coyote hunting excuse” is used by most of the bad guys, even when you have them dead to rights.
Hunting big game with the aid of artificial light is almost always done by cruising rural road systems at a slow rate while casting a high powered light along adjacent logging clear cuts or fields, as well as the roads themselves. Calibers used in big game spotlighting cases range from small calibers to reduce noise (and ultimately detection), to high powered rifles, with high powered rifles being the typical choice of poachers. Extensive field officer experience has shown that those hunting big game in this manner are often in the possession of a pre-loaded rifle in the vehicle, or load it from within the vehicle once the game is spotted. A number of unintentional discharges have occurred during spotlighting events, endangering the occupants. Animals are usually shot from, or in, the roadway. There is also greater potential for incidents of reckless endangerment or property damage when high-powered rifles are discharged at night. WDFW and local law enforcement agencies receive complaints every year of homes and buildings being struck by wayward bullets as people shoot illegally at animals located in fields and orchards. These structures, like people, are not visible beyond the range of the spotlight, but are within the range of the rifle round. But this all can be mitigated when someone hunts away from the vehicle, finds a backstop, and identifies shooting lanes. Calling in animals provides an opportunity to consider safety zones.
The general public safety issues associated with spotlighting big-game (or any night hunting) are one concern, but I have eluded to another – the danger to the officer, especially when there are exceptions like hunting small game at night. In our experience, those illegally spotlighting big game are often either intoxicated or on drugs. Suspects avoid being contacted by responding officers, leading to vehicle pursuits. Our history has at least one example of where a Fish and Wildlife Officer was forced to exchange gun-fire with a spotlighting suspect, resulting in the suspect's death. Pennsylvania lost an officer last year on a spot lighting case. In order to minimize the danger to the officer by these armed violators, decrease escalation like a pursuit, and increase successful arrest, contacts are generally done with duty firearms at the low ready and from an area of tactical advantage and cover. The suspect is first taken into custody, all firearms and passengers are secured, and then the investigative interview begins. When a bank is robbed, law enforcement does not respond as if a teller inadvertently bumped the alarm……… because they know that worrying about exceptions up front when guns are involved can result in tragedy. On the other hand, none of us want to have a legitimate small game hunter contacted in high-risk mode.
The best way for me to proceed might be to take it section by section:
WAC 232-12-063 Hunting at night‑-Regulations‑-Penalties. (1) It is unlawful to hunt small game animals or unclassified wildlife at night, unless all of the following requirements are met:
(a) Artificial lights used in the hunting activity are not attached to or projected from any motor vehicle.
(b) Shooting occurs at least fifty feet from a motor vehicle.
We are trying to separate the two activities – illegally spotlighting big game which usually occurs from a vehicle, and legitimate small game hunters that can pursue that activity with calls, back stops, and away from the vehicle. These two provisions are the backbone of the proposal and intended to increase officer safety, and enforceability associated with spotlighting big-game.
(c) Firearms are restricted to .22 caliber rifles and handguns, and shotguns are restricted to no. 6 shot or smaller. Hunting with bow and arrow is allowed.
For what it was worth, this was an ill-conceived idea, with good intentions. We looked at a number of other state’s night hunting rules, and many constrained the caliber. The original thought was to limit projectiles that travel great distances for public safety sake, and provide some deterrence for those really out looking for deer and elk at night with larger calibers. Of course, many elk and deer have been poached with .22 caliber rifles. So the deterrence factor probably isn’t there - it can be argued that .22 caliber rounds travel just as far as some larger calibers, and many popular predator calibers would be excluded by this provision. The idea no longer seems like a good one and you won’t see caliber restrictions in any future proposals from the WDFW Law Enforcement Bureau.
(d) During the months of September, October, or November hunting does not occur in areas closed to hunting for deer or elk with centerfire rifles.
Whoops, we meant to say “open," not closed. This provision was intended to follow current regulation in that you can’t hunt coyotes, bobcat or raccoons in areas that have center fire rifle deer and elk season underway. I wasn’t going to go into the reason behind this, because it’s old law carried forward.
(e) Hunting activity is further than five hundred yards from any structure or temporary habitation located on public land.
After consideration, this would be a difficult distance to determine for officer and hunter both. Plus, some situations warrant safe shooting within this distance. We figured that reckless endangerment laws were sufficient in addressing the public safety piece. You probably won’t see this one in a future proposal.
(f) The hunting activity occurs within published open seasons.
I don’t need to explain this one.
(2) Private landowners or their designees that possess a valid depredation permit issued by the department are exempt from the above requirements while hunting on the permit designated property. Nothing in this section removes the right of property owners, their immediate family members, their documented employees, or tenants of real property, pursuant to RCW 77.36.030, to trap or kill wildlife that is threatening human health and safety or causing property damage on that property, without the licenses required under RCW 77.32.010 or authorization from the director under RCW 77.12.240.
Landowners, tenants, family members and employees were exempted – designees would need to get a free permit.
(3) A violation of this section involving killing, hunting, taking, holding, possessing, or maliciously injuring or harming unclassified wildlife is an infraction punishable under RCW 77.15.160. A violation of this section involving killing, hunting, taking, holding, possessing, or maliciously injuring or harming big game animals, small game animals, protected wildlife, or endangered wildlife is a crime punishable under RCW 77.15.410, 77.15.430, 77.15.130, or 77.15.120, depending on the animal or wildlife killed, hunted, taken, held, possessed, or maliciously injured or harmed.
These are standard penalties already in statute being cited above.
Hope this helps with your understanding………… OG
Post by: lokidog on February 15, 2012, 08:22:24 AM
Thanks OG for the info and update.
Post by: Bob33 on February 15, 2012, 09:05:08 AM
Perhaps as important as removing this proposed change from the draft proposal, in this instance WDFW has demonstrated that they do listen to hunters, they do consider many facets when implementing change (some of which hunters may not consider), and will change course when prudent.
Post by: spookgus on February 15, 2012, 09:07:24 AM
Post by: bobcat on February 15, 2012, 09:59:00 AM
Thanks so much for taking the time to explain all that. You just saved me from having to write a letter to the Fish & Wildlife Commission regarding the proposed night hunting rules! I'm now glad that I procrastinated. :)
Post by: Machias on February 15, 2012, 11:16:35 AM
I sure wish you guys would have done this with the outlawing of dogs for coyotes, we could have helped avert bad rules there as well. ;)
Post by: Special T on February 15, 2012, 12:47:24 PM
Post by: Snopczynski on February 15, 2012, 01:21:43 PM
Post by: bobcat on February 15, 2012, 01:31:46 PM
So .223, 22-250 and 3" Dead Coyote "T" Shot are still legal to hunt with correct?
223 and 22-250 would have been legal even under the new proposed night hunting rules, but yes, it sounds like nothing is changing for now, so your T shot will remain legal.
Post by: carpsniperg2 on February 15, 2012, 02:31:18 PM
Outdoor Guardian,
Thanks so much for taking the time to explain all that. You just saved me from having to write a letter to the Fish & Wildlife Commission regarding the proposed night hunting rules! I'm now glad that I procrastinated. :)
Og thanks for the update! This one has been a big worry of mine. Since I do a lot of spotlighting! I am glad to see that the people that use spotlighting in a legal way to harvest predators will still have there rights to do so. I have sent 4 different letters already before seeing this over the last week or so since the new proposals have come out. I am very happy to hear the update and think that maybe our voice was heard and that is the reason for them taking the restrictions off :tup:
Post by: bearpaw on February 15, 2012, 05:30:58 PM
Thankyou for responding on this topic. Good communication can resolve a lot of issues. The ommissions you mention in future night hunting recommendations are good. But, I do have a few comments about (a) and (b).
I do not always call coyotes when I go coyote hunting, sometimes I travel mountain roads looking for coyotes, and sometimes I simply sit in a parked truck (in which cases we of course get out to shoot). If night hunting I have a spotlight that plugs into my cigarrette lighter and a person can scan for coyotes with the light from time to time.
To hound hunt in my area, raccoon is all there is since WDFW outlawed coyote hunting with dogs. Where I live we do not have a lot of raccoon, so it helps to cover ground with a vehicle and I have used my cigarette plug-in spotlight to shine waterways or openings in areas where there may be raccoon. Then we get the dogs out, hike to where we saw the raccoon and start the track. Even by employing this method, success is low due to the low raccoon population in our area. We have been checked numerous times through the years by various LE officers and everything checked out OK.
In the interest of making these types of hunting more identifiable, I would suggest requiring hunters to stop a vehicle before shining a light while night hunting, that seems reasonable. If officers see a moving vehicle spotlighting and the people have a gun, that would be a violation.
I know a lot of folks who increasingly use 4x4 trucks or ATV's for hunting. When I get older I can see myself hunting more and more with the aid of moterized travel. As long as a person gets out of or off of the vehicle I beleive they should be able to shoot.
I understand your concerns for officers, but I honestly feel it is too easy to forget about the opportunities that are lost to some individuals because of the desire to make the job easier for law enforcement. I get a fair number of hunters who are not capable of much hiking, I hate to see more and more rules that make it harder and harder for these individuals to recreate. Not all hunters are physically fit for much hiking but they are perfectly capable of getting out of a motor vehicle to shoot. (They don't need a disabled permit to shoot from inside the vehicle because they can get out.)
It also seems like measuring off 50 feet to where an officer thought a person was standing in darkness would be a bit of a challenge to prove.
With all these issues in mind I would like to suggest the following language:
WAC 232-12-063 Hunting at night‑-Regulations‑-Penalties.
(1) It is unlawful to hunt small game animals or unclassified wildlife at night, unless all of the following requirements are met:
(a) Artificial lights used in the hunting activity are not projected from a moving motor vehicle.
(b) Weapons can not be discharged while in or on a motor vehicle.
(c) During the months of September, October, or November hunting does not occur in areas open to modern firearms seasons for deer or elk.
(d) The hunting activity occurs within published open seasons.
(2) Private landowners or their designees that possess a valid depredation permit issued by the department are exempt from the above requirements while hunting on the permit designated property. Nothing in this section removes the right of property owners, their immediate family members, their documented employees, or tenants of real property, pursuant to RCW 77.36.030, to trap or kill wildlife that is threatening human health and safety or causing property damage on that property, without the licenses required under RCW 77.32.010 or authorization from the director under RCW 77.12.240.
(3) A violation of this section involving killing, hunting, taking, holding, possessing, or maliciously injuring or harming unclassified wildlife is an infraction punishable under RCW 77.15.160. A violation of this section involving killing, hunting, taking, holding, possessing, or maliciously injuring or harming big game animals, small game animals, protected wildlife, or endangered wildlife is a crime punishable under RCW 77.15.410, 77.15.430, 77.15.130, or 77.15.120, depending on the animal or wildlife killed, hunted, taken, held, possessed, or maliciously injured or harmed.
Post by: Special T on February 15, 2012, 05:38:58 PM
Post by: bearpaw on February 15, 2012, 05:51:03 PM
I must say i don't like the idea of not using a spotlight while driving... Not all places and conditions are the same. If i'm out shining a wheat stubble field out in the middle of no where, its not the same a timber or hill country. I saw plenty of deer when i waas shining coyotes for the Warden coyote derby, doesn't mean i was poatching, or even had the inclination...
Very true, this is a great example of why it's good to get input from many people. Perhaps that part needs dropped altogether?
Post by: Machias on February 17, 2012, 08:10:47 AM
I use a spotlight from the truck all the time will coon hunting, I understand the reasoning behind it somewhat. but when I have young dogs to train it works out good to be able to see a coon, and turn the young dogs loose on a fresh track. One that you know is desired game.
There is actually a much easier, cheaper and better way to start pups. You can build a coon feeder. Great way to know where the coons will be, start hot tracks. Plus as long as you don't shoot them the coons will usually give you a good race and tree not too far away and keep coming back. Just a thought.
Post by: Special T on February 17, 2012, 10:07:26 AM
Post by: Bob33 on February 17, 2012, 10:44:22 AM
They saw the Subaru and ran like hell over the beaver damn. :chuckle:I thought Subarus were only owned by liberal animal lovers that would never harm another living thing?
:chuckle:
Post by: lokidog on February 17, 2012, 07:52:07 PM
They saw the Subaru and ran like hell over the beaver damn. :chuckle:I thought Subarus were only owned by liberal animal lovers that would never harm another living thing?
:chuckle:
He wasn't trying to "harm' the.....
"I will name [one] George, and I will hug him, and pet him, and squeeze him" :chuckle:
Post by: Jim the Plumber on February 23, 2012, 02:22:38 PM
I read where you state the night hunting proposal has been shelved, but when I read the WDFW web page, I see that it is still there.
Can you clarify.
Jim
Post by: bobcat on February 23, 2012, 02:27:27 PM
Outdoor Guardian,
I read where you state the night hunting proposal has been shelved, but when I read the WDFW web page, I see that it is still there.
Can you clarify.
Jim
I don't see why they would remove it from the proposals, why not leave it there for people to see? I believe all he said is that it has been decided that they won't be adopting the proposed new night hunting rules.
Post by: Bob33 on February 23, 2012, 02:39:40 PM
Correct. They're not going to update the online draft each time a change is noted. They'll make them all at once.Outdoor Guardian,
I read where you state the night hunting proposal has been shelved, but when I read the WDFW web page, I see that it is still there.
Can you clarify.
Jim
I don't see why they would remove it from the proposals, why not leave it there for people to see? I believe all he said is that it has been decided that they won't be adopting the proposed new night hunting rules.
Post by: bobcat on February 23, 2012, 02:42:33 PM
http://wdfw.wa.gov/commission/meetings/2012/03/agenda_mar1012.html
Post by: 400out on February 23, 2012, 02:54:48 PM
Post by: Gringo31 on February 23, 2012, 03:08:00 PM
I thought it would help me cover the sage?
Post by: Jim the Plumber on February 23, 2012, 03:33:18 PM
Outdoor Guardian,
I read where you state the night hunting proposal has been shelved, but when I read the WDFW web page, I see that it is still there.
Can you clarify.
Jim
I don't see why they would remove it from the proposals, why not leave it there for people to see? I believe all he said is that it has been decided that they won't be adopting the proposed new night hunting rules.
I followed your link to the meeting agenda and it states :
Proposed Adoption:
WAC 232-12-063 Hunting at night-regulations-penalties
Post by: bobcat on February 23, 2012, 04:09:55 PM
(we hope)
Post by: Outdoor Guardian on February 24, 2012, 04:11:05 PM
Outdoor Guardian,
I read where you state the night hunting proposal has been shelved, but when I read the WDFW web page, I see that it is still there.
Can you clarify.
Jim
Jim, the website just hasn't been updated with a revised agenda yet. The night hunting proposal is definitely not on the table at this time. OG