Post by: edmondshunter on July 24, 2008, 05:40:25 PM
A. Can he carry a back-up shotgun?
B. Does he have to wear Orange?
C. Are we pushing the limits of the law?
Post by: popeshawnpaul on July 24, 2008, 05:44:49 PM
B. No.
C. Yes if you do either above... Otherwise no.
Post by: edmondshunter on July 24, 2008, 05:52:53 PM
Post by: Slenk on July 24, 2008, 06:09:44 PM
Slenk
Post by: billythekidrock on July 24, 2008, 06:11:24 PM
Your friend can get a license for an extra $20 for first time , and one time only with out the gun saftey . Can't remember what it's called but the program is there to introduce new hunters.
Slenk
Wouldn't he need a "sponsor" that would have to give up a tag? Not sure, but I thought I heard it like that. Anyone have any info?
Post by: Slenk on July 24, 2008, 06:19:46 PM
Slenk
Post by: huntnfmly on July 24, 2008, 06:22:07 PM
Post by: billythekidrock on July 24, 2008, 06:27:38 PM
Not the way I was told . But I don't know . You know how the info from WDF&G is. We were looking into it for one of my grandsons . And were told that we just had to buy the license and tags and pay the $20.
Slenk
You are probably right.
Here is a link to some info on the deferral. Seems vague, but it is a start. http://wdfw.wa.gov/enf/huntered/deferral_info.pdf
Post by: bobcat on July 24, 2008, 06:54:27 PM
Post by: popeshawnpaul on July 24, 2008, 07:07:13 PM
Post by: bobcat on July 24, 2008, 07:13:53 PM
Post by: ICEMAN on July 24, 2008, 07:18:47 PM
I don't see why he couldn't carry a shotgun, even without a hunting license. As long as he does not shoot a bear with it, he should be ok. I'd just tell the warden, if asked, that he is carrying it as a backup gun for you. And he doesn't have to wear orange since he is not a licensed hunter, but of course there is nothing that says he can't wear it. You being the licensed hunter don't need to wear orange either, for bear hunting it is not required.
Agree.
Look, if someone went with me fishing and they just wanted to watch, they need no license. If they wanted a shotgun in the boat, that is ok. No different if they wanted to watch me call in a bear. They go with, they sit, they watch. They are not going to shoot a bear, unless they are charged by an aggresive bear, and then only in self defense. You could go and carry a sidearm, why not a shotgun?
Also, bobcat, Seattle just got ranked the 2nd most restrictive Nanny State (City) in the country... I love this state, just hate most of the people in it....
http://reason.com/news/show/127481.html
Post by: billythekidrock on July 24, 2008, 07:21:08 PM
Quote
What if I was bear hunting and I wanted to carry a bow, in case I got a close shot opportunity, but I also wanted to have a rifle along in case I had to take a longer shot?
If there is an archery elk season going on and you have an archery elk tag in your pocket you don't want to pack both a bow and a rifle while bear hunting. We had this same discussion and were told it was a no-no that would result in a ticket.
Post by: bobcat on July 24, 2008, 07:23:39 PM
QuoteWhat if I was bear hunting and I wanted to carry a bow, in case I got a close shot opportunity, but I also wanted to have a rifle along in case I had to take a longer shot?
If there is an archery elk season going on and you have an archery elk tag in your pocket you don't want to pack both a bow and a rifle while bear hunting. We had this same discussion and were told it was a no-no that would result in a ticket.
What if it's in August (or September) before elk season opens?
Post by: billythekidrock on July 24, 2008, 07:25:18 PM
Post by: popeshawnpaul on July 24, 2008, 07:26:32 PM
Post by: billythekidrock on July 24, 2008, 07:34:25 PM
However, who goes out bear hunting with a gun but your not really bear hunting?
Ooo..:hello: Ooo..:hello:
I know.. :hello: I know... :hello:
Post by: bobcat on July 24, 2008, 07:35:17 PM
Post by: Curly on July 24, 2008, 07:38:45 PM
Post by: Bscman on July 24, 2008, 09:29:46 PM
Yeah I figured you'd have a reason why it wouldn't be kosher. But I don't see why the friend couldn't carry an extra gun to help the licensed hunter. Just because he's holding a gun doesn't mean he's hunting. Can't I go for a hike in the woods in August with no intent to look for bears and carry any gun I want? Isn't that a right covered by the 2nd amendment? What if I want to go hiking and carry a 44 mag on my belt? Does that mean I am bear hunting?
I asked a similar question to a WDFW officer last fall...
He cautioned me, stating the states definition of the word "hunting."
Quote
"To hunt" and its derivatives means an effort to kill, injure, capture, or harass a wild animal or wild bird."
If you're with a licensed hunter, in the field, actively pursuing bear with them, wearing camo/hunters orange, sitting while he's calling, aiding in a stalk, and you're carrying a loaded shotgun...you are hunting, by legal definition in the state of washington, whether you're the one pulling the trigger or not!
Do you really need a backup gun?
If so, you should probably consider wearing it on a sling, on your back, or in a holster on your person....or tell him to wait until next weekend, after he passes the class and gets his license!
Personally, I think one gun is enough...we're not talking about massive, aggressive grizzlies up north!
Post by: edmondshunter on July 24, 2008, 09:55:03 PM
My buddy is just accident prone so he's always over prepared. I told him we didnt need a back-up, but he did have a valid point about how thick the brush is. Wounded bear would be a bad sitch for all. Im gonna check into the one time lic. thing.
Post by: MichaelJ on July 24, 2008, 10:01:50 PM
Michael
Post by: Timberstalker on July 24, 2008, 10:03:22 PM
Post by: Houndhunter on July 24, 2008, 10:10:54 PM
Post by: popeshawnpaul on July 24, 2008, 10:41:11 PM
I say if you want, go do it. I call it "job security" and would love to argue the case. I think I could win that case.
By the way, my brother went hunting with me one time. I had a deer tag and was hunting deer, and he just had a hunting license. He informed the game warden he was just coyote hunting. After being grilled for over an hour, the officer realized he didn't have probable cause and let him walk. It was close and he was nearly in custody. Was he doing anything illegal? No. But the presumption was he was hunting deer without a license. Could he have been convicted? Sure if the jury didn't believe him. Could he have been found not guilty? Sure if the jury believed him or thought the officer/prosecutor hadn't proven the case beyond a reasonable doubt. Do you get the jist? There are a lot of innocent people that get found guilty every day for one reason or another.
Post by: billythekidrock on July 25, 2008, 06:00:17 AM
Hell he could just say he is hunting Sasquatch. Aint no tag or license for them critters
But isn't that against the law in some counties? :chuckle:
Post by: Gutpile on July 25, 2008, 06:10:39 AM
I wouldn't bring a gun if I were with a hunter and I wasn't licensed.
Post by: Bscman on July 25, 2008, 06:46:43 AM
By the way, my brother went hunting with me one time. I had a deer tag and was hunting deer, and he just had a hunting license. He informed the game warden he was just coyote hunting. After being grilled for over an hour, the officer realized he didn't have probable cause and let him walk. It was close and he was nearly in custody. Was he doing anything illegal? No. But the presumption was he was hunting deer without a license.
It's probably reasons like this that they changed the regs to state you cannot hunt with a .24+ caliber rifle during an open firearm deer or elk season, unless you have a deer/elk modern firearm, or bear tag.
Too many people out in the woods "coyote hunting" with .300win mags.
(I'm not calling you or your buddy a liar!!!)
Post by: zackmioli on July 25, 2008, 09:02:55 AM
Post by: Curly on July 25, 2008, 09:19:44 AM
I asked a similar question to a WDFW officer last fall...
He cautioned me, stating the states definition of the word "hunting."
"To hunt" and its derivatives means an effort to kill, injure, capture, or harass a wild animal or wild bird."
If you're with a licensed hunter, in the field, actively pursuing bear with them, wearing camo/hunters orange, sitting while he's calling, aiding in a stalk, and you're carrying a loaded shotgun...you are hunting, by legal definition in the state of washington, whether you're the one pulling the trigger or not!
I wouldn't want to test the law and end up in court either (unless I had a lot of money for lawyer fees). But the way I read the definition of hunt, I don't see how you could say that the unlicensed guy with the gun is hunting unless he is trying to "kill, injure, capture, or harass a wild animal or wild bird" himself. He is just keeping the hunter company and there to help pack meat if needed. If he is carrying a gun for self protection, that is not really hunting.
But again, it probably wouldn't hold up in court. Just like the muzzleloader scenario where a guy has someone carrying a backup rifle for the hunter to use for a followup shot if necessary...........the guy would most likely get a ticket and lose in court.
Post by: bobcat on July 25, 2008, 09:46:22 AM
Sorry but I just don't see how one can be cited for carrying a gun in the woods. There is no law against it. To prove a person is hunting I would think they would have to see that person shoot, or attempt to shoot something. I should not have to explain why I am carrying a gun around in the woods, whether it is during a hunting season or not. Maybe I'm not a hunter at all but I'm afraid of snakes, and that's why I am carrying my 300 magnum. It shouldn't matter what the reason is, it is my right to carry a gun and that right is protected by the 2nd amendment.
Post by: bucklucky on July 25, 2008, 09:50:35 AM
I personally wouldn't have a problem with it, but nowadays there isn't much for leniency anymore, its by the book. And with the statement Bscman had pretty much answers the question at hand.
And by the way, I do hunt yotes with a 300 min mag, its my gun of preference. POOF! no more yote!
Post by: robodad on July 25, 2008, 09:55:55 AM
Post by: MooseStock on July 25, 2008, 10:01:47 AM
Post by: popeshawnpaul on July 25, 2008, 10:13:59 AM
Our criminal system works on guilty until proven innocent. While they say otherwise, everything about the process speaks to the fact that you are guilty until proven innocent.
-When you are arrested you need to post a bail because you are a threat to the community...
-You must expend a lot of money to fight a charge against you and if you win they don't pay you back...
-You can be held in jail until you are found "innocent"...
-Newspaper and TV news agencies report the case and your name as if you have already done the charge...
-You lose your weapons and rights to weapons while a domestic violence case is pending...
-On a domestic violence case, you can't see your wife and/or kids for months while charges are pending, you must also move out of your home...
-If you are angry and instead of hitting your spouse you hit the door as we are taught not to hit women, you get charged with DV malicious mischief and a no contact order goes out because that door is half hers under community property rules, and you damaged her property so you go to jail and can't see your family for months, etc...
-You must oftentimes plea to a charge you didn't commit if you want out of jail or to see your family in quick fashion...
-Your property can be seized with many types of criminal charges. You must fight to get that back as well in a separate proceeding. The standard in that case is less than "beyond a reasonable doubt"...
-etc...
Post by: saylean on July 25, 2008, 10:14:58 AM
Of course, I wouldnt run into any sort of trouble (to my knowledge) as non of them would have a gun on them.
I was really just wondering if they could come with me...but then I couldnt really figure out a reason why they couldnt.
Post by: bucklucky on July 25, 2008, 10:19:34 AM
Post by: saylean on July 25, 2008, 10:22:56 AM
the guest would not have a weapon with them (no need for hunters orange since its bear), I would have all tags, legal crap, ...they wouldnt be covered in blueberry jam....
I would think the warden would be happy I am trying to introduce newbies to hunting.. ;)
But I know that is not why he/she is there. Guess I will find out if I get stopped.
Post by: robodad on July 25, 2008, 10:26:23 AM
Think I am safe...
the guest would not have a weapon with them (no need for hunters orange since its bear), I would have all tags, legal crap, ...they wouldnt be covered in blueberry jam....
I would think the warden would be happy I am trying to introduce newbies to hunting.. ;)
But I know that is not why he/she is there. Guess I will find out if I get stopped.
Be sure they have government issued legal documentation and identification !! :chuckle:
Post by: popeshawnpaul on July 25, 2008, 10:44:37 AM
Post by: bobcat on July 25, 2008, 11:01:33 AM
Are you guys saying that game wardens can just make stuff up and write people up for whatever they want, with no proof whatsoever?
If I am out coyote hunting and a game warden stops me and asks what I am hunting, is he going to assume I am lying when I say I am hunting coyotes?
We went out a couple months ago in Capitol Forest and called in and killed a coyote. My friend and I were both carrying 270's. Could we have been charged with hunting bears out of season? There is a good chance a bear could have come in to the call, and isn't a 270 too big for coyotes?
Man there are so many different scenarios I could come up with but to me it is not illegal to carry a gun in the woods so I will continue to do so and won't worry about some game warden writing me up for hunting something that is not in season, and/or that I don't have a tag for. From some of these posts it sounds to me like I'm living in a communist country. :bash:
Post by: popeshawnpaul on July 25, 2008, 11:15:00 AM
From some of these posts it sounds to me like I'm living in a communist country. :bash:
Just sounds like you have never been raked through the coals of our criminal justice system.
I think it comes down to common sense. If you have a gun and you are hunting with a guy that is clearly bear hunting, that's suspicious. If you are like my brother and you are hunting coyotes with a 7mm mag on the opening day of deer season, it's a bit suspicious. It all depends on the scenario.
Post by: robodad on July 25, 2008, 11:38:18 AM
From some of these posts it sounds to me like I'm living in a communist country. :bash:
Just sounds like you have never been raked through the coals of our criminal justice system.
I think it comes down to common sense. If you have a gun and you are hunting with a guy that is clearly bear hunting, that's suspicious. If you are like my brother and you are hunting coyotes with a 7mm mag on the opening day of deer season, it's a bit suspicious. It all depends on the scenario.
I agree and if you do it make absolutely sure that is the only thing they can question you about because you WILL be eyeballed up one side and down the other looking for the smallest reason to get you guaranteed "Good luck"
Post by: bucklucky on July 25, 2008, 12:25:54 PM
Post by: Bscman on July 25, 2008, 12:38:47 PM
Hmm...so what if a guy is hunting coyotes with his 300 win mag, he could be charged with hunting bears, or deer, or elk, or all of the above, without a tag? :dunno:
Are you guys saying that game wardens can just make stuff up and write people up for whatever they want, with no proof whatsoever?
If I am out coyote hunting and a game warden stops me and asks what I am hunting, is he going to assume I am lying when I say I am hunting coyotes?
We went out a couple months ago in Capitol Forest and called in and killed a coyote. My friend and I were both carrying 270's. Could we have been charged with hunting bears out of season? There is a good chance a bear could have come in to the call, and isn't a 270 too big for coyotes?
Read the regs!
It specifically states that you CANNOT hunt coyote/small game with a firearm .24 or larger in caliber during an open modern firearm or deer or elk season, unless you have a modern firearm deer/elk/bear/cougar tag.
So in this example, YES you are breaking the law hunting 'yotes with a .300winmag GIVEN the restrictions above.
I wouldn't want to test the law and end up in court either (unless I had a lot of money for lawyer fees). But the way I read the definition of hunt, I don't see how you could say that the unlicensed guy with the gun is hunting unless he is trying to "kill, injure, capture, or harass a wild animal or wild bird" himself. He is just keeping the hunter company and there to help pack meat if needed. If he is carrying a gun for self protection, that is not really hunting.
You might not *actually* be hunting, but you are with someone who is actively hunting...you're in the woods, with a buddy, pursuing bear. You also have a rifle.
I'm with popeshawnpaul on this one...it would look awefully suspicious to the warden!
I would question you without hesitation. If I saw it while in the woods, I'd probably report it. More often than not, activities like that are very shady--not on the up and up.
Post by: bobcat on July 25, 2008, 12:48:03 PM
These are just made up scenarios. I won't be contacting the WDFW because I don't really care what they say about it one way or the other.
I enjoy debating this stuff over and over. :chuckle:
Post by: bobcat on July 25, 2008, 12:52:28 PM
I'm with popeshawnpaul on this one...it would look awefully suspicious to the warden!
I would question you without hesitation. If I saw it while in the woods, I'd probably report it. More often than not, activities like that are very shady--not on the up and up.
What would you report? That you saw two people walking in the woods, each carrying a gun, and you don't know if they both had all the proper licenses and tags?
If you're going to report stuff like that you're going to be making a lot of phone calls!
Post by: Bscman on July 25, 2008, 12:54:02 PM
My questions to WDFW:
Is it legal to hunt large game with a legal rifle as the primary, but
also carry a secondary firearm such as a shotgun for upland bird/grouse?
How might this be affected if you are hunting with a NON-hunting (non-license
carrying) friend? Is it legal for the party that is hunting to carry two
firearms, each suited for a particular task, while the second party is just
along to enjoy the experience?
(My fiance is the consideration here).
Response from Dennis Nicks, WDFW, Olympia
Yes, in accordance with the hunting season in question, a hunter may carry as many lawful firearms as he likes. A shotgun must meet the specifications in WAC 232.12.047. I recommend that you do not have a non-hunter accompanying you while you are hunting. They can wait in your vehicle or they can purchase the appropriate license and tag. We have a pretty broad definition of hunting in Washington (see below) and the risk is that your “partner” could be charged with hunting without a license. DWN
RCW 77.08.010 (7) "To hunt" and its derivatives means an effort to kill, injure, capture, or harass a wild animal or wild bird.
What would you report? That you saw two people walking in the woods, each carrying a gun, and you don't know if they both had all the proper licenses and tags?Obviously not.
If you're going to report stuff like that you're going to be making a lot of phone calls!
Have you never come across other hunters/outdoorsmen and chatted with them?
I'd find it suspicious when someone said "Yeah, my buddy has a license...but I'm just out with my rifle, tagging along, just for the experience."
:rolleyes:
Post by: Curly on July 25, 2008, 12:57:08 PM
Post by: bobcat on July 25, 2008, 12:58:25 PM
Post by: Bscman on July 25, 2008, 01:01:12 PM
People offer up a lot of self-incriminating evidence with little to no encouragement...ask any LEO!
Post by: bobcat on July 25, 2008, 01:05:07 PM
I'll tell you what you do if you want to take your girlfriend along on a hunt, and you want her to carry one of your guns for you. Just take the gun from her when you are arriving back to your vehicle so that you have both guns. Then the warden can't say she was hunting since you have both guns. And we all know game wardens don't get out of their trucks so no worries. Besides you're not breaking the law anyway. They just think you are. :rolleyes:
Post by: Curly on July 25, 2008, 01:05:39 PM
Quote
I recommend that you do not have a non-hunter accompanying you while you are hunting. They can wait in your vehicle or they can purchase the appropriate license and tag.
This quote kind of pisses me off, but I understand he has to say that. As a kid I used to tag along with my dad and watch him hunt sometimes. That is a good way to get non-hunters into the sport........let them go along with you to watch.....
Post by: Houndhunter on July 25, 2008, 01:08:35 PM
Post by: WDFW-SUX on July 25, 2008, 01:10:04 PM
Post by: bobcat on July 25, 2008, 01:10:26 PM
all you have to say is that your carry a fire arm for your own protection while out in the woods, and your good. you dont have to anwser all there bull$#$% Q's. thats one thing i hate about gameys they always try to make you say your doing somthin wrong when your perfectly legally
Exactly! Finally someone who gets it!
I have to say though that I personally have never had a problem with a game warden. I just don't see why some think it's illegal to carry a gun in the woods.
Post by: Curly on July 25, 2008, 01:13:20 PM
The whole thing is stupid. Who cares if they do everything except shoot. I bet calling an elk for someone without having a hunting licence is illegal too >:(
According to the definition that the WDFW warden tried to use, I guess it could be illegal. :bash:
Post by: Bscman on July 25, 2008, 01:31:28 PM
According to the definition that the WDFW warden tried to use, I guess it could be illegal. :bash:
Ding Ding Ding...
I'm not arguing that any of it is illegal...simply that it will raise a LOT of suspicion.
Personally, I'd rather just avoid the hassle all together.
As for my lady...she has her license this year, so it's no long of any concern.
Post by: bucklucky on July 25, 2008, 02:09:36 PM
Post by: popeshawnpaul on July 25, 2008, 03:26:37 PM
(in my analagous scenario with my brother, it was the early 90's and the current rules about a .24 or greater rifle weren't in effect)
Post by: MIKEXRAY on July 25, 2008, 05:58:54 PM
Post by: bucklucky on July 25, 2008, 06:24:17 PM
It's well worth the money Bucklucky... :chuckle:
(in my analagous scenario with my brother, it was the early 90's and the current rules about a .24 or greater rifle weren't in effect)
:chuckle:
Post by: steeleywhopper on July 27, 2008, 10:07:40 AM
Post by: popeshawnpaul on July 27, 2008, 10:15:01 AM
To me it sounds like BS, but his lawyer advised him to plead guilty and take the lower plea bargain.
Sounds like a BS lawyer. If the facts are as you state, there is no way I would plea a guy on that. Screw them, do a trial. (believe it or not, some lawyers are afraid to go to trial) Getting a lawyer is just like getting a mechanic or contractor. Just like any profession, there are good and bad ones.
Post by: WDFW-SUX on July 27, 2008, 10:23:51 AM
I dont think that a real crime :chuckle: