Hunting Washington Forum

Big Game Hunting => Elk Hunting => Topic started by: JDHasty on May 15, 2016, 01:15:34 AM

Title: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 15, 2016, 01:15:34 AM
http://www.yakimaherald.com/news/local/hunter-facing-charges-after-death-of-beloved-elk-named-bullwinkle/article_844ec8ac-1a65-11e6-8639-53981ae0fc80.html
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: BULLBLASTER on May 15, 2016, 01:32:50 AM
That article doesn't paint a great picture for hunting in general...
Not a good deal any way you look at it.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 15, 2016, 01:52:23 AM
I have no problem except the hunt was not legal. 

What earthly value the "trophy" has as a hunting trophy escapes me.  But that is not any of my concern.   What a man hangs in his trophy room is his business, but this was a clear cut case of Unlawful Hunting of Big Game. 

It is the violation of our game laws and the audacity of the act that disturbs me more than the taking of an elk that has a name attached to it. 

I liked the fact that I could find this elk for my kids to look at, but hey, my kids understand that "while Canada geese are beautiful, when you pull their feathers out they have meat inside."

I did make the Bullwinkle analogy knowing full well....  but hey, a legal elk is a legal elk and an "elk" that has palmated antlers, is almost black and has a little friend that answers to the name of Rocket J is not a legal elk.  No one gets to hunt him irrespective of what elk tag you have. 

Well, this blond poster child of a bull elk might just as well have been all of the above for purpose  of his being a legal elk.  Just by virtue that he was munching alfalfa in GMU 334 in GMU 334 when shot he might as well have had palmated antlers, been almost black and had a little friend named Rocket J.

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bean Counter on May 15, 2016, 04:38:20 AM
Is this the same story which drew a multipage discussion earlier this year and there was someone getting hot and bothered about a legal issue?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: TVHunts on May 15, 2016, 05:56:38 AM
I guess no more speculation on this one.  I can't grasp it being called a trophy due to the way it was harvested, to each his own I suppose.  That fact that it was likely illegal compounds my view even further. 

I think he should have his hunting rights revoked for life myself.  I also think the people that helped him should be charged and prosecuted as well.  They assisted him for some cash which is pretty disgusting. There is not even a small chance that the locals didn't know this was out of the legal hunting unit.

Clowns like this make us all look bad...
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Magnum_Willys on May 15, 2016, 06:25:51 AM
He paid big bucks for the "Any Bull" tag.  I would assume that means ANY bull as long as you are following the hunting times and other regulations for that area. If its open for Elk you can shoot Any Bull.  ???  Not defending the guy just wondering did the tag say only good in branch antlered units?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: MADMAX on May 15, 2016, 06:30:19 AM
Definitely something for him to be proud of
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on May 15, 2016, 06:34:32 AM
I guess no more speculation on this one.  I can't grasp it being called a trophy due to the way it was harvested, to each his own I suppose.  That fact that it was likely illegal compounds my view even further. 

I think he should have his hunting rights revoked for life myself.  I also think the people that helped him should be charged and prosecuted as well.  They assisted him for some cash which is pretty disgusting. There is not even a small chance that the locals didn't know this was out of the legal hunting unit.

Clowns like this make us all look bad...

Let the court system do its job before you make judgements like that. That article had very little research put into it. Looks like the guy just read the thread that was put on here. No wonder at all legal action is going to be used. A few guys on here, and one in particular have spread information that is not accurate.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: BUTTER on May 15, 2016, 07:08:21 AM
Seems unlikely someone with a tag like that would risk a chance of getting in trouble at least you'd hope not
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: andrew_in_idaho on May 15, 2016, 07:11:55 AM
He paid big bucks for the "Any Bull" tag.  I would assume that means ANY bull as long as you are following the hunting times and other regulations for that area. If its open for Elk you can shoot Any Bull.  ???  Not defending the guy just wondering did the tag say only good in branch antlered units?
The tag specified any bull elk in east side GMUs open to branch antlered bull hunting. The ellensburg GMU doesn't have any branch antlered bull opportunities
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 15, 2016, 07:25:18 AM
He paid big bucks for the "Any Bull" tag.  I would assume that means ANY bull as long as you are following the hunting times and other regulations for that area. If its open for Elk you can shoot Any Bull.  ???  Not defending the guy just wondering did the tag say only good in branch antlered units?

Absolutely 100%, unequivocally, the tag is not valid in GMU's closed to branched antler elk hunting. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on May 15, 2016, 07:39:43 AM
Interesting side note here....

"Bullwinkle often fed at the home of Mark and Frances Chmelewski, the couple who gave him that name.

“He would come into our yard and eat apples off our tree, and we’d sit and watch, just meters from him,” Mark Chmelewski said.

“Every year we’d say a little prayer that Bullwinkle would survive the hunting season because he was just such a beautiful, majestic animal.”"

 and then after google

http://www.dailyrecordnews.com/news/frances-chmelewski-is-new-kittitas-county-superior-court-judge/article_61b61d0a-162c-11e1-8f9d-001cc4c03286.html


Karma??
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 15, 2016, 07:50:29 AM
I guess no more speculation on this one.  I can't grasp it being called a trophy due to the way it was harvested, to each his own I suppose.  That fact that it was likely illegal compounds my view even further. 

I think he should have his hunting rights revoked for life myself.  I also think the people that helped him should be charged and prosecuted as well.  They assisted him for some cash which is pretty disgusting. There is not even a small chance that the locals didn't know this was out of the legal hunting unit.

Clowns like this make us all look bad...

Let the court system do its job before you make judgements like that. That article had very little research put into it. Looks like the guy just read the thread that was put on here. No wonder at all legal action is going to be used. A few guys on here, and one in particular have spread information that is not accurate.

There is nothing in the article that supports your claims.  In fact it looks like the author did his own research.   
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Magnum_Willys on May 15, 2016, 07:53:11 AM
Uh yea not much wiggle room here....
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on May 15, 2016, 08:30:21 AM
Seems unlikely someone with a tag link that would risk a chance of getting in trouble at least you'd hope not

I'm not going to comment on any details while this case is open  or before the person on this forum gets served. I will tell you great steps were taken to do the right thing.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: TVHunts on May 15, 2016, 08:35:40 AM
I guess no more speculation on this one.  I can't grasp it being called a trophy due to the way it was harvested, to each his own I suppose.  That fact that it was likely illegal compounds my view even further. 

I think he should have his hunting rights revoked for life myself.  I also think the people that helped him should be charged and prosecuted as well.  They assisted him for some cash which is pretty disgusting. There is not even a small chance that the locals didn't know this was out of the legal hunting unit.

Clowns like this make us all look bad...

Let the court system do its job before you make judgements like that. That article had very little research put into it. Looks like the guy just read the thread that was put on here. No wonder at all legal action is going to be used. A few guys on here, and one in particular have spread information that is not accurate.

Paragraph 1, sentence 3, I state "likely illegal".  The rest of my post then becomes qualified by those words I believe. I Guess I could have been more careful and clear with my opinion as to not offend anyone.

I'm looking forward to following the legal proceedings. 

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bobcat on May 15, 2016, 08:48:34 AM
Great article. Lots of facts, even some things I didn't already know. I'm not sure if it makes hunting in general look bad, but it certainly looks bad for the auction and raffle tags.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on May 15, 2016, 08:54:34 AM
Seems unlikely someone with a tag link that would risk a chance of getting in trouble at least you'd hope not

I'm not going to comment on any details while this case is open  or before the person on this forum gets served. I will tell you great steps were taken to do the right thing.

And the right thing was?  :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on May 15, 2016, 08:58:09 AM
Seems unlikely someone with a tag link that would risk a chance of getting in trouble at least you'd hope not

I'm not going to comment on any details while this case is open  or before the person on this forum gets served. I will tell you great steps were taken to do the right thing.

And the right thing was?  :chuckle:

Welcome to the site. Pretty big first couple of posts.

And who is getting served if you don't mind me asking.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on May 15, 2016, 09:23:04 AM
Seems unlikely someone with a tag link that would risk a chance of getting in trouble at least you'd hope not

I'm not going to comment on any details while this case is open  or before the person on this forum gets served. I will tell you great steps were taken to do the right thing.

And the right thing was?  :chuckle:

Welcome to the site. Pretty big first couple of posts.

And who is getting served if you don't mind me asking.

Thank you for the welcome.  I signed up to this forum to hopefully clear things up some. There has been a lot of false information posted on this site. A call was made to the game department asking if it was ok to shoot the bull where it located. After Morgan Grant from the game department checked into it another phone conversation took place and the hunters were told they absolutely could harvest that bull with that tag at that location. If in fact the info given was wrong the game department is the one to be blamed.

As for the person on here that will be dealing with legal issues, I can't tell you who that is at this point. But if you read the thread on this topic that was removed it would be really easy for you to guess who.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: BUTTER on May 15, 2016, 09:54:06 AM
I believe a phone conversation if in fact went down is no excuse on where you killed the animal. Come on we all know where and when we can hunt and ifnwe don't we shouldn't be hunting. Like I said though who really knows all the facts this is between the hunter and the state officials now hownit stands. I hope though for the hunter he was in fact doing the right thing
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on May 15, 2016, 10:04:58 AM
I believe a phone conversation if in fact went down is no excuse on where you killed the animal. Come on we all know where and when we can hunt and ifnwe don't we shouldn't be hunting. Like I said though who really knows all the facts this is between the hunter and the state officials now hownit stands. I hope though for the hunter he was in fact doing the right thing

You have every right to that opinion. My opinion is that if you are unsure of something you should be able to call your well paid public servant that is supposed to be the professional on the subject and get clarification.

I will say I would rather be in the hunters shoes facing that legal issue, than facing the civil issue the guy will be dealing with for publicly dragging the hunter through the mud. Win lose or draw it's going to be a really long drawn out EXPENSIVE situation.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Branden on May 15, 2016, 10:07:07 AM
I'm not going to comment on the legalities of it because I was not there nor the one that got supposed permission to hunt that area.

I do have a problem though with the part about how it's bad to shoot an animal in a field. Zero difference then shooting a cat out of a tree. Neither one takes any skill yet 99% of the people on this site would jump at the chance to shoot a lion in a tree. The first thread on this issue was started because guys were saying it wasn't much of a hunt. Not that it was illegal. Then that started after a page or two.

So for the guys that are saying it's not hunting get off your high horse.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: DaveMonti on May 15, 2016, 10:10:02 AM
Really, we're doing this again, a day after the previous lengthy topic was locked?  Can't people just be happy for now that the State has filed charges and now let the process work instead of all this needless discussion over a well beaten topic? 

I hope this thread is locked quickly so it doesn't keep popping up in my "show new replies to your post" page. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JLS on May 15, 2016, 10:11:22 AM
I believe a phone conversation if in fact went down is no excuse on where you killed the animal. Come on we all know where and when we can hunt and ifnwe don't we shouldn't be hunting. Like I said though who really knows all the facts this is between the hunter and the state officials now hownit stands. I hope though for the hunter he was in fact doing the right thing

You have every right to that opinion. My opinion is that if you are unsure of something you should be able to call your well paid public servant that is supposed to be the professional on the subject and get clarification.

I will say I would rather be in the hunters shoes facing that legal issue, than facing the civil issue the guy will be dealing with for publicly dragging the hunter through the mud. Win lose or draw it's going to be a really long drawn out EXPENSIVE situation.

Common sense would seem to dictate that it's foolish to talk about an issue on a public forum with legal action pending, regardless of whether you side with the plaintiff or the defendant.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: h20hunter on May 15, 2016, 10:12:47 AM
There is an ignore feature you may choose to use.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on May 15, 2016, 10:17:45 AM
I believe a phone conversation if in fact went down is no excuse on where you killed the animal. Come on we all know where and when we can hunt and ifnwe don't we shouldn't be hunting. Like I said though who really knows all the facts this is between the hunter and the state officials now hownit stands. I hope though for the hunter he was in fact doing the right thing

You have every right to that opinion. My opinion is that if you are unsure of something you should be able to call your well paid public servant that is supposed to be the professional on the subject and get clarification.

I will say I would rather be in the hunters shoes facing that legal issue, than facing the civil issue the guy will be dealing with for publicly dragging the hunter through the mud. Win lose or draw it's going to be a really long drawn out EXPENSIVE situation.

Common sense would seem to dictate that it's foolish to talk about an issue on a public forum with legal action pending, regardless of whether you side with the plaintiff or the defendant.

I haven't and won't say anything that will have any effect on either issue. I could say a lot more on the issue, but will not for the exact reason you mentioned.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: h20hunter on May 15, 2016, 10:25:15 AM
You state you signed up to this forum to hopefully clear some things up.

Please, by all means, clear things up.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: HntnFsh on May 15, 2016, 10:26:36 AM
You state you signed up to this forum to hopefully clear some things up.

Please, by all means, clear things up.

I was also wondering when that was going to happen!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Mr Mykiss on May 15, 2016, 10:36:16 AM
I love this "I know but I'm not gonna tell you" stuff...
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: mfswallace on May 15, 2016, 10:41:40 AM
Seems unlikely someone with a tag link that would risk a chance of getting in trouble at least you'd hope not

I'm not going to comment on any details while this case is open  or before the person on this forum gets served. I will tell you great steps were taken to do the right thing.

And the right thing was?  :chuckle:

Welcome to the site. Pretty big first couple of posts.

And who is getting served if you don't mind me asking.

Thank you for the welcome.  I signed up to this forum to hopefully clear things up some. There has been a lot of false information posted on this site. A call was made to the game department asking if it was ok to shoot the bull where it located. After Morgan Grant from the game department checked into it another phone conversation took place and the hunters were told they absolutely could harvest that bull with that tag at that location. If in fact the info given was wrong the game department is the one to be blamed.

As for the person on here that will be dealing with legal issues, I can't tell you who that is at this point. But if you read the thread on this topic that was removed it would be really easy for you to guess who.

Legal precedence was set in this situation when good old uncle Joe told every one to I said, ‘Jill, if there’s ever a problem, just walk out on the balcony here, put that double-barrel shotgun and fire two blasts outside the house"

Didn't work for anyone who did that and used it as a defense...
http://therighttobear.com/why-a-man-ended-up-in-jail-after-listening-to-joe-bidens-advice-on-guns/
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/03/joe-biden-defense-gun-case-jeffrey-barton-116178

so if the vice president tells you it's ok to break the law and it doesn't work as a legal defense the word of a sergeant or anyone for that matter at wdfw ain't gonna work :twocents:

POACHING and those who condoned this however high up in wdfw should be terminated ! Money shouldn't allow you to break the law :bash:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntingfool7 on May 15, 2016, 10:44:08 AM
A repeat offender with deep pockets with a defense of an alleged phone call. 

Fines and reparations won't mean anything.  IF WDFW isn't too addicted to his money, his hunting privileges should be revoked.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 15, 2016, 10:58:27 AM
My recollection of what I had read a few years ago re: the earlier incident was that those who had been involved in the investigation were convinced they had solid evidence of a game law violation and involving the aerial spotting and felt betrayed that that charge had not been pursued.   But that charge was never pursued so I don't think the case could be made that he is a repeat game law violator.  The fact is though he did admit to breaking other laws while hunting in that case.   
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: coachcw on May 15, 2016, 11:00:23 AM
My guess is people have joined the forum to distract or draw attention away from there involvement in a messy situation . The fact that people have posted the bull was shot in 334 is true ,the involved parties aren't denying that . Whether or not they knew it was illegal or if they had permission is what the courts will decide . My guess is a few new members are also old members . I know that  there was plenty of peacocking and discriminating evidence flying around in pm's . The bottom line is this whole thing is a mess and the defendant has deep enough pockets that the whole thing wont matter much to him . My hopes are the whole thing is resolved before Sept 1st in regards to the 2016 auction tag . I imagine if found guilty he could just gift it to a friend all though I'm not sure if that's legal .
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: coachcw on May 15, 2016, 11:02:04 AM
Crazy how politicians can slander and lie about each other and nothing happens is nuts in comparison to what has been said about the defendant . 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: full choke on May 15, 2016, 11:16:33 AM
End result of this whole debacle?- You or I will not have to obey GMU boundaries, because apparently they mean nothing.

I sincerely hope this mount on the wall justifies the means...
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: grundy53 on May 15, 2016, 11:24:51 AM
End result of this whole debacle?- You or I will not have to obey GMU boundaries, because apparently they mean nothing.

I sincerely hope this mount on the wall justifies the means...
Only if you have enough money...

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Ghost Hunter on May 15, 2016, 11:56:38 AM
My guess is people have joined the forum to distract or draw attention away from there involvement in a messy situation . The fact that people have posted the bull was shot in 334 is true ,the involved parties aren't denying that . Whether or not they knew it was illegal or if they had permission is what the courts will decide . My guess is a few new members are also old members . I know that  there was plenty of peacocking and discriminating evidence flying around in pm's . The bottom line is this whole thing is a mess and the defendant has deep enough pockets that the whole thing wont matter much to him . My hopes are the whole thing is resolved before Sept 1st in regards to the 2016 auction tag . I imagine if found guilty he could just gift it to a friend all though I'm not sure if that's legal .
:yeah:  Exactly!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bulldogs40 on May 15, 2016, 11:59:31 AM
oh good, another animal with a name was killed by a person with too much money that calls himself a hunter and has the money to hire people to do the hard work for him. I think the term harvester would be more appropriate... or poacher.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bullkllr on May 15, 2016, 12:00:12 PM
I read some of the posts in the other thread with mild interest.

Seeing the story laid out in that article, and if the facts are as they appear, all I have to say is WOW  :yike:
So much wrong about the whole scenario.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: trophyhunt on May 15, 2016, 12:02:06 PM
I read some of the posts in the other thread with mild interest.

Seeing the story laid out in that article, and if the facts are as they appear, all I have to say is WOW  :yike:
So much wrong about the whole scenario.
:yeah:  I didn't bother reading the last thread for the most part, what a mess!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on May 15, 2016, 12:22:37 PM
 How does an anonymous screen name get sued?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: coachcw on May 15, 2016, 12:34:36 PM
remember there no freedom of speech  in merica !
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Miles on May 15, 2016, 12:35:21 PM
How does an anonymous screen name get sued?

Not sure if you're joking or not, but this is straight out of the forum rules:

Quote
These rules are subject to change at any time for any reason, I will update this topic when there is a change.

 The owners of this forum reserve the right to reveal your identity (or any other related information collected on this service) in the event of a formal complaint, legal, or lawful action arising from your use of this forum.

Thank You,
Forum Management Team
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on May 15, 2016, 12:37:23 PM
How does an anonymous screen name get sued?

Not sure if you're joking or not, but this is straight out of the forum rules:

Quote
These rules are subject to change at any time for any reason, I will update this topic when there is a change.

 The owners of this forum reserve the right to reveal your identity (or any other related information collected on this service) in the event of a formal complaint, legal, or lawful action arising from your use of this forum.

Thank You,
Forum Management Team

I don't know the guy's name. Do you have to provide your full legal name when you register here? I honestly have no clue as I signed up a really long time ago and don't remember.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on May 15, 2016, 12:40:35 PM
 Ironic that the day after Dale closes down the thread, this article comes out and starts a whole new one.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: cbond3318 on May 15, 2016, 12:45:50 PM
Ironic that the day after Dale closes down the thread, this article comes out and starts a whole new one.

Not ironic, disrespectful.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on May 15, 2016, 12:48:04 PM
Ironic that the day after Dale closes down the thread, this article comes out and starts a whole new one.

Not ironic, disrespectful.

 The Yakima Herald disrespected Dale? Really?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bowhunterwa87 on May 15, 2016, 12:50:11 PM
So ppl are being threatened with lawsuites..topics being closed..women have their own special board... Wow this forum isnt what it was when i signed on
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: cbond3318 on May 15, 2016, 12:52:32 PM
Ironic that the day after Dale closes down the thread, this article comes out and starts a whole new one.

Not ironic, disrespectful.


 The Yakima Herald disrespected Dale? Really?

I guess you did say article, I mis read that. I meant , the need to post this article knowing damn well it would be a continuation of the recently locked thread is disrespectful to this forum and Bearpaw.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on May 15, 2016, 12:52:44 PM
So ppl are being threatened with lawsuites..topics being closed..women have their own special board... Wow this forum isnt what it was when i signed on

Wow. Sorry to hear that.
Title: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on May 15, 2016, 12:53:45 PM
Ironic that the day after Dale closes down the thread, this article comes out and starts a whole new one.

Not ironic, disrespectful.


 The Yakima Herald disrespected Dale? Really?

I guess you did say article, I mis read that. I meant , the need to post this article knowing damn well it would be a continuation of the recently locked thread is disrespectful to this forum and Bearpaw.

I agree. There's a reason the other one was shut down. Special thanks to JDHasty for reviving this hot mess.
:bash:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on May 15, 2016, 12:54:37 PM
Ironic that the day after Dale closes down the thread, this article comes out and starts a whole new one.

Not ironic, disrespectful.


 The Yakima Herald disrespected Dale? Really?

I guess you did say article, I mis read that.

 Do you now see the irony? ;)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: coachcw on May 15, 2016, 01:47:34 PM
Maybe  it's just the common folk feeling pushed around .  I HOPE ANOTHER MEMBER POSTS HIS VIDEO LINK  .Just for clarification  :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 15, 2016, 02:02:06 PM
I was totally unaware that the other thread had been locked when I posted this.  I was in central WA until almost 10 pm. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Smossy's Girl on May 15, 2016, 02:22:51 PM
So ppl are being threatened with lawsuites..topics being closed..women have their own special board... Wow this forum isnt what it was when i signed on

When did you sign on? because none of that is new.. there's been lawsuit threats, our own special women's board, and topics being closed down since prior to 2013 when you signed up ;)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on May 15, 2016, 02:51:57 PM
Ironic that the day after Dale closes down the thread, this article comes out and starts a whole new one.

Not ironic, disrespectful.


 The Yakima Herald disrespected Dale? Really?

I guess you did say article, I mis read that. I meant , the need to post this article knowing damn well it would be a continuation of the recently locked thread is disrespectful to this forum and Bearpaw.

I agree. There's a reason the other one was shut down. Special thanks to JDHasty for reviving this hot mess.
:bash:

Due to the reason given of legal threats for removing the other thread I think this goes way past disrespectful.  I am very suprised this forum continues to let this individual have access knowing his actions may lead to legal headaches for them.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bobcat on May 15, 2016, 03:07:21 PM
Well actually, I have to say, I was glad that someone posted a link to the Yakima Herald article. I may not have seen it otherwise. I probably would have posted it myself if I had come across it first. This is also being discussed on Facebook and I'm sure there are comments being posted in the Yakima Herald as well.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Miles on May 15, 2016, 03:14:11 PM
I didn't realize Tod was so old. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on May 15, 2016, 03:14:58 PM
Curious to know if all the people posting on Facebook regarding this case will be sued too?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on May 15, 2016, 03:15:31 PM
Will Zuckerberg be sued also?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: rosscrazyelk on May 15, 2016, 03:15:52 PM
The only argument  i would have in response to the guy who says he knows permission from the warden..
If it was legal to shoot why haul it and gut it in another unit?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: grundy53 on May 15, 2016, 03:18:45 PM
Curious to know if all the people posting on Facebook regarding this case will be sued too?
How about the Yakima Herald? Or the people on 24hourcampfire?

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kentrek on May 15, 2016, 03:19:29 PM
The only argument  i would have in response to the guy who says he knows permission from the warden..
If it was legal to shoot why haul it and gut it in another unit?

Some farmers don't want a gut pile in there field, I've done the exact same a couple times
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bob33 on May 15, 2016, 03:34:57 PM
Anyone can sue anyone else, at any time, for any reason,  or for no reason. Whether or not it is successful is another issue, but at a minimum the party being sued will likely have some financial consequences. To an extent our legal system is a matter of "how much justice can you afford? " If someone with deep pockets wants to make someone else miserable, it's quite doable.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on May 17, 2016, 02:52:20 PM
Anyone can sue anyone else, at any time, for any reason,  or for no reason. Whether or not it is successful is another issue, but at a minimum the party being sued will likely have some financial consequences. To an extent our legal system is a matter of "how much justice can you afford? " If someone with deep pockets wants to make someone else miserable, it's quite doable.

 Which is why the indivual pursuing the suit should have to front the estimated costs and have the balance paid in full before leaving the courthouse if they lose, or sit in jail until it's paid.

 My guess is that would reduce the backlog of cases and make people think twice before pursuing some of these BS suits. :twocents:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: birddogdad on May 17, 2016, 03:30:45 PM
Well actually, I have to say, I was glad that someone posted a link to the Yakima Herald article. I may not have seen it otherwise. I probably would have posted it myself if I had come across it first. This is also being discussed on Facebook and I'm sure there are comments being posted in the Yakima Herald as well.

thanks for the link to the article. I find it interesting how this one animal and hunter has created such a stir... from a different perspective, this person has probably put into WA state conservation (financially) MORE than this entire site full of hunters combine since just 2007. I don't know him, his ethics, or how rich he is either.. This animal was a conservation tool, used to draw money from us all for a chance of a lifetime, one ticket ever year for me too! Ethics and location maybe not so much. In the end, the money this one hunter has given has most likely made a direct impact in WA and now, the state will waste most of it (i bet) toward litigation and investigation fees. Why not just fix the book to allow this to occur, after all, these raffles and auction tags are just designed to make conservation dollars as I am led to understand in all the writings right? One draw, one animal, one hunter? Is it really that bad that this old rich dude paid to play or are we just jealous and casting stones?
Again, just considering the gain from all the moneys invested, not the ethical hunting of one man position. I find it more appalling when a person of this financial affluence takes the route of posting up a 100K piece of property his millionaire buddies to hunt and not giving back, don't you?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: idahohuntr on May 17, 2016, 03:34:03 PM
I'm very curious what the defendant is claiming the false statements were...he has been criminally charged in the matter.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bob33 on May 17, 2016, 03:35:33 PM
Well actually, I have to say, I was glad that someone posted a link to the Yakima Herald article. I may not have seen it otherwise. I probably would have posted it myself if I had come across it first. This is also being discussed on Facebook and I'm sure there are comments being posted in the Yakima Herald as well.

thanks for the link to the article. I find it interesting how this one animal and hunter has created such a stir... from a different perspective, this person has probably put into WA state conservation (financially) MORE than this entire site full of hunters combine since just 2007. I don't know him, his ethics, or how rich he is either.. This animal was a conservation tool, used to draw money from us all for a chance of a lifetime, one ticket ever year for me too! Ethics and location maybe not so much. In the end, the money this one hunter has given has most likely made a direct impact in WA and now, the state will waste most of it (i bet) toward litigation and investigation fees. Why not just fix the book to allow this to occur, after all, these raffles and auction tags are just designed to make conservation dollars as I am led to understand in all the writings right? One draw, one animal, one hunter? Is it really that bad that this old rich dude paid to play or are we just jealous and casting stones?
Again, just considering the gain from all the moneys invested, not the ethical hunting of one man position. I find it more appalling when a person of this financial affluence takes the route of posting up a 100K piece of property his millionaire buddies to hunt and not giving back, don't you?
The use of money to justify illegal and unethical behavior will always occur, but that doesn't make it right.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 17, 2016, 06:37:56 PM
The story is in the Lewis County Chronicle & the Spokesman Review

http://www.spokesman.com/blogs/outdoors/2016/may/17/hunter-charged-shooting-celebrity-bull-elk-near-ellensburg/

http://www.chronline.com/crime/salkum-hunter-facing-charges-after-death-of-beloved-elk-named/article_c6877e8a-1b91-11e6-9a1e-039042d648b6.html
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: NOCK NOCK on May 17, 2016, 08:47:58 PM
 NOCK's  Top Ten List

1. kiticaashunter, Welcome to the site. Maybe think about going to the "new member" thread and tell us about yourself. Personally, I take more stock in what people I know tell me, more than from a stranger.  :twocents:

2. This is definitely not the 1st one of these type of permits(auction/raffle) that the defendant has had in his WA hunting career. The fact that he had to CALL ANYONE, including WDFW, to ask if he could shoot this bull is just silly. Come on, there can only be one reason the call was made, he knew it was not legal (easily understood in the regs) Why else would you call???  If he got a thumbs up to shoot, he had a scapegoat.

3. This is a prime example of why PUBLIC game animals should not be sold to the wealthy. I don't care how much money he has given the state, the animals are public property and should not be sold to the highest bidder.

4. Hunting to me is the act of going out into the forest, woods, wildland, sage, even an alfalfa field, and using my wits and skill to get within lethal range of a truly wild animal (not a semi tame one) , and then killing it to feed my family. The antlers are just a side bonus. What was done in this case was NOT HUNTING, more like shooting.

5. A lot of talk about how much $$ this individual has put into conservation in WA ST. If one TRULY cares about the well being of the critters, and that same person is very well off, why not just donate to the cause and not expect a permit in return? 

6. Absolutely do not understand how a person could be proud of acquiring a "trophy" in this manner.

7. kiticaashunter, Curious as to who the second phone call was to.  :dunno:

8. No, I am not jealous,  :rolleyes:, If I had that kinda money, I could find much more satisfying ways to hunt, ( like trying to kill a big game animal in all 50 states in 1 years time)

9. This is better than a soap opera.  :P

10. Thank You JDHasty, keep standing up for what you believe in.  :tup:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lokidog on May 17, 2016, 08:57:39 PM
 :yeah:

Anyone can sue anyone else, at any time, for any reason,  or for no reason. Whether or not it is successful is another issue, but at a minimum the party being sued will likely have some financial consequences. To an extent our legal system is a matter of "how much justice can you afford? " If someone with deep pockets wants to make someone else miserable, it's quite doable.

 Which is why the indivual pursuing the suit should have to front the estimated costs and have the balance paid in full before leaving the courthouse if they lose, or sit in jail until it's paid.

 My guess is that would reduce the backlog of cases and make people think twice before pursuing some of these BS suits. :twocents:

This is a whole other topic... but very true.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JJB11B on May 17, 2016, 09:04:23 PM
Interesting side note here....

"Bullwinkle often fed at the home of Mark and Frances Chmelewski, the couple who gave him that name.

“He would come into our yard and eat apples off our tree, and we’d sit and watch, just meters from him,” Mark Chmelewski said.

“Every year we’d say a little prayer that Bullwinkle would survive the hunting season because he was just such a beautiful, majestic animal.”"

 and then after google

http://www.dailyrecordnews.com/news/frances-chmelewski-is-new-kittitas-county-superior-court-judge/article_61b61d0a-162c-11e1-8f9d-001cc4c03286.html


Karma??
oh snap!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: coachcw on May 17, 2016, 09:07:02 PM
Wonder if the judge is a hunter ?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JimmyHoffa on May 17, 2016, 09:33:57 PM
Interesting side note here....

"Bullwinkle often fed at the home of Mark and Frances Chmelewski, the couple who gave him that name.

“He would come into our yard and eat apples off our tree, and we’d sit and watch, just meters from him,” Mark Chmelewski said.

“Every year we’d say a little prayer that Bullwinkle would survive the hunting season because he was just such a beautiful, majestic animal.”"

 and then after google

http://www.dailyrecordnews.com/news/frances-chmelewski-is-new-kittitas-county-superior-court-judge/article_61b61d0a-162c-11e1-8f9d-001cc4c03286.html


Karma??
oh snap!
Wonder if that actually helps him?  Can't the defense petition to bring in an unrelated judge from another county if there is some kind of conflict?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on May 17, 2016, 09:49:56 PM
 :yeah:  I see this helping the defense in justifying a change of venue as this article and this site paints a picture of "locals" already established as prejudice towards the person facing charges.

I'm not supporting him, I'm just stating a possibility. It's painted the picture of guilty before getting a fair trial by a juror of peers.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: mfswallace on May 17, 2016, 09:55:05 PM
:yeah:  I see this helping the defense in justifying a change of venue as this article and this site paints a picture of "locals" already established as prejudice towards the person facing charges.

I'm not supporting him, I'm just stating a possibility. It's painted the picture of guilty before getting a fair trial by a juror of peers.

Seems like there are enough supporters [ however misguided] from the valley as well so no need to change venue  :twocents:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on May 17, 2016, 10:13:39 PM
I see this helping the defense in justifying a change of venue

 I wouldn't mind seeing it moved to King County!

 

 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: TriggerMike on May 17, 2016, 11:01:00 PM
Is this the same guy and the same tag but 9 years ago? Interesting. Prior allegations and convictions don't usually help an alleged poachers case.

http://nwsportsmanmag.com/headlines/trophy-elk-hunter-must-stay-out-of-national-forests-for-2-years-after-pleading-guilty-to-charges-related-to-2007-governors-tag-kill/
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: csaaphill on May 17, 2016, 11:10:00 PM
Really, we're doing this again, a day after the previous lengthy topic was locked?  Can't people just be happy for now that the State has filed charges and now let the process work instead of all this needless discussion over a well beaten topic? 

I hope this thread is locked quickly so it doesn't keep popping up in my "show new replies to your post" page.
:chuckle: yea but what fun is that lol.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Shawn Ryan on May 17, 2016, 11:45:28 PM
Interesting side note here....

"Bullwinkle often fed at the home of Mark and Frances Chmelewski, the couple who gave him that name.

“He would come into our yard and eat apples off our tree, and we’d sit and watch, just meters from him,” Mark Chmelewski said.

“Every year we’d say a little prayer that Bullwinkle would survive the hunting season because he was just such a beautiful, majestic animal.”"

 and then after google

http://www.dailyrecordnews.com/news/frances-chmelewski-is-new-kittitas-county-superior-court-judge/article_61b61d0a-162c-11e1-8f9d-001cc4c03286.html


Karma??

Payback's a bit*×! and her stripper name is Karma!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 18, 2016, 05:21:09 AM
Interesting side note here....

"Bullwinkle often fed at the home of Mark and Frances Chmelewski, the couple who gave him that name.

“He would come into our yard and eat apples off our tree, and we’d sit and watch, just meters from him,” Mark Chmelewski said.

“Every year we’d say a little prayer that Bullwinkle would survive the hunting season because he was just such a beautiful, majestic animal.”"

 and then after google

http://www.dailyrecordnews.com/news/frances-chmelewski-is-new-kittitas-county-superior-court-judge/article_61b61d0a-162c-11e1-8f9d-001cc4c03286.html


Karma??
oh snap!
Wonder if that actually helps him?  Can't the defense petition to bring in an unrelated judge from another county if there is some kind of conflict?

They already have.  The judge he was to appear in front of in the arraignment is from Yakima I think.  It is not one of the local judges. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: danderson on May 18, 2016, 07:08:14 AM
It should be moved to Upper Kittitas County District court,  :twocents:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: WAcoyotehunter on May 18, 2016, 07:19:33 AM
I'm not going to comment on the legalities of it because I was not there nor the one that got supposed permission to hunt that area.

I do have a problem though with the part about how it's bad to shoot an animal in a field. Zero difference then shooting a cat out of a tree. Neither one takes any skill yet 99% of the people on this site would jump at the chance to shoot a lion in a tree. The first thread on this issue was started because guys were saying it wasn't much of a hunt. Not that it was illegal. Then that started after a page or two.

So for the guys that are saying it's not hunting get off your high horse.
You do a lot of hound hunting Brandon??
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: syoungs on May 18, 2016, 07:46:49 AM
I'm not going to comment on the legalities of it because I was not there nor the one that got supposed permission to hunt that area.

I do have a problem though with the part about how it's bad to shoot an animal in a field. Zero difference then shooting a cat out of a tree. Neither one takes any skill yet 99% of the people on this site would jump at the chance to shoot a lion in a tree. The first thread on this issue was started because guys were saying it wasn't much of a hunt. Not that it was illegal. Then that started after a page or two.

So for the guys that are saying it's not hunting get off your high horse.
You do a lot of hound hunting Brandon??

I would guess not lol
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 2MANY on May 18, 2016, 08:22:26 AM
Greed.

Some suffer from it.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: HighCountryHunter88 on May 18, 2016, 08:46:08 AM
I'm not going to comment on the legalities of it because I was not there nor the one that got supposed permission to hunt that area.

I do have a problem though with the part about how it's bad to shoot an animal in a field. Zero difference then shooting a cat out of a tree. Neither one takes any skill yet 99% of the people on this site would jump at the chance to shoot a lion in a tree. The first thread on this issue was started because guys were saying it wasn't much of a hunt. Not that it was illegal. Then that started after a page or two.

So for the guys that are saying it's not hunting get off your high horse.
You do a lot of hound hunting Brandon??

oooo you beat me to it!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: h20hunter on May 18, 2016, 08:49:24 AM
Drive to field, shoot elk.

Cut tracks, release hounds, track, follow, find, keep up and not fall off a cliff,  find treed cat,  decide to shoot,  if not, repeat again if you have the strength.

Sounds the same to me!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 18, 2016, 08:53:28 AM
Well actually, I have to say, I was glad that someone posted a link to the Yakima Herald article. I may not have seen it otherwise. I probably would have posted it myself if I had come across it first. This is also being discussed on Facebook and I'm sure there are comments being posted in the Yakima Herald as well.

thanks for the link to the article. I find it interesting how this one animal and hunter has created such a stir... from a different perspective, this person has probably put into WA state conservation (financially) MORE than this entire site full of hunters combine since just 2007. I don't know him, his ethics, or how rich he is either.. This animal was a conservation tool, used to draw money from us all for a chance of a lifetime, one ticket ever year for me too! Ethics and location maybe not so much. In the end, the money this one hunter has given has most likely made a direct impact in WA and now, the state will waste most of it (i bet) toward litigation and investigation fees. Why not just fix the book to allow this to occur, after all, these raffles and auction tags are just designed to make conservation dollars as I am led to understand in all the writings right? One draw, one animal, one hunter? Is it really that bad that this old rich dude paid to play or are we just jealous and casting stones?
Again, just considering the gain from all the moneys invested, not the ethical hunting of one man position. I find it more appalling when a person of this financial affluence takes the route of posting up a 100K piece of property his millionaire buddies to hunt and not giving back, don't you?

So should he also be able to shoot a Record Book Roosevelt in Grays Harbor, Lewis or Pacific County?  If not why not?  Here, let me answer that for ya:  Because that South Central Washington - Big Game Raffle Tag is not good there.  WTH is so hard to figure out about that.

Now, re: the "Bullwinkle" aspects of this - just because something is legal, is it a smart thing to do?   Well, irrespective of the legal issues, Scott Sandsberry was talking with residents and property owners all around the area who had absolutely no idea that any law was broken.   They were PO'd, and they thought that shooting this bull was wrong and they were talking to Scott Sandsberry about why they thought it was wrong, but they had no idea that the tag he used to kill the bull with came with this restriction: 
South Central Washington - Big Game $ 17.00 per ticket
Elk: Any 300 or 500 series GMU open to elk hunting except GMUs not open to branch antlered bull elk hunting
http://wdfw.wa.gov/hunting/permits/raffles/index.html   
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: teanawayslayer on May 18, 2016, 09:01:20 AM
That article doesn't paint a great picture for hunting in general...
Not a good deal any way you look at it.
I agree 100%.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: whacker1 on May 18, 2016, 09:05:21 AM
following along for the ride
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bearpaw on May 18, 2016, 09:16:21 AM
I'm not going to comment on the legalities of it because I was not there nor the one that got supposed permission to hunt that area.

I do have a problem though with the part about how it's bad to shoot an animal in a field. Zero difference then shooting a cat out of a tree. Neither one takes any skill yet 99% of the people on this site would jump at the chance to shoot a lion in a tree. The first thread on this issue was started because guys were saying it wasn't much of a hunt. Not that it was illegal. Then that started after a page or two.

So for the guys that are saying it's not hunting get off your high horse.
You do a lot of hound hunting Brandon??

oooo you beat me to it!

he likely has never cougar hunted....

I've been lucky enough to do many different hunts, including hunts in several other countries, cougar hunting is still my favorite hunt. Some of the best cougar hunts have ended by taking photos and leaving the cat in the tree! The most rewarding part is watching the young hounds learn and develop into experienced lion hounds. Almost anyone can become successful in many types of hunting, but to be a top notch hound hunter requires incredible dedication by the hunter and a very sharp learning curve. After all the time and work to get good at hound hunting, you can take your dogs to field, search for days and sometimes weeks to find a good track, you and your dogs can experience the thrill of the hunt, hopefully you catch the cat and get photos of the hunted, and then you leave the hunted animal unharmed in the wild after experiencing the hunt of lifetime. Hunting really can't get any better than that!

For those that choose to notch a cougar tag you then have some of the best meat in the woods!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: dscubame on May 18, 2016, 09:26:28 AM
following along for the ride

The ride sucks I may suggest you get off at the first stop.  It is like a bad groundhog day, a scratched broken record.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: birddogdad on May 18, 2016, 10:02:55 AM
Well actually, I have to say, I was glad that someone posted a link to the Yakima Herald article. I may not have seen it otherwise. I probably would have posted it myself if I had come across it first. This is also being discussed on Facebook and I'm sure there are comments being posted in the Yakima Herald as well.

thanks for the link to the article. I find it interesting how this one animal and hunter has created such a stir... from a different perspective, this person has probably put into WA state conservation (financially) MORE than this entire site full of hunters combine since just 2007. I don't know him, his ethics, or how rich he is either.. This animal was a conservation tool, used to draw money from us all for a chance of a lifetime, one ticket ever year for me too! Ethics and location maybe not so much. In the end, the money this one hunter has given has most likely made a direct impact in WA and now, the state will waste most of it (i bet) toward litigation and investigation fees. Why not just fix the book to allow this to occur, after all, these raffles and auction tags are just designed to make conservation dollars as I am led to understand in all the writings right? One draw, one animal, one hunter? Is it really that bad that this old rich dude paid to play or are we just jealous and casting stones?
Again, just considering the gain from all the moneys invested, not the ethical hunting of one man position. I find it more appalling when a person of this financial affluence takes the route of posting up a 100K piece of property his millionaire buddies to hunt and not giving back, don't you?

So should he also be able to shoot a Record Book Roosevelt in Grays Harbor, Lewis or Pacific County?  If not why not?  Here, let me answer that for ya:  Because that South Central Washington - Big Game Raffle Tag is not good there.  WTH is so hard to figure out about that.

Now, re: the "Bullwinkle" aspects of this - just because something is legal, is it a smart thing to do?   Well, irrespective of the legal issues, Scott Sandsberry was talking with residents and property owners all around the area who had absolutely no idea that any law was broken.   They were PO'd, and they thought that shooting this bull was wrong and they were talking to Scott Sandsberry about why they thought it was wrong, but they had no idea that the tag he used to kill the bull with came with this restriction: 
South Central Washington - Big Game $ 17.00 per ticket
Elk: Any 300 or 500 series GMU open to elk hunting except GMUs not open to branch antlered bull elk hunting
http://wdfw.wa.gov/hunting/permits/raffles/index.html   

again I don't agree with the whole thing he did. was just saying that he definitely has contributed large sums to the state and now they will just use it up in court proceedings. reviews show suspect activities since 2007, why blame just him? allowing continued contributions from 2007 forward is frankly a state swing and a miss. since this raffle and auction is all about the money, the state WDFW didn't step in and prevent his participation after past adjudicated activity. To me, its not hard to understand JD, my point was either they (state) cares or they are just going thru motions, he was as I understand, forced off lands for a couple years by courts after 2007/8 raffle/auction tag episode yet still allowed to throw money into the state hoppers and participate in follow on auctions and raffles, that was the major state miss. Now, the state industry will waste money, not using it for conservation in this process. This person has as I read in articles, a fairly unlimited resources to dip from, how much will the state spend to pursue him? I would think that WDFW raffles and auctions programs could restrict individual participation and everyone moves on and conservation dollars are used for conservation. I get it upsets everyone here, myself included, but I blame more than the act or individual here...
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Alchase on May 18, 2016, 10:26:36 AM
Ironic that the day after Dale closes down the thread, this article comes out and starts a whole new one.

Not ironic, disrespectful.


 The Yakima Herald disrespected Dale? Really?

I guess you did say article, I mis read that. I meant , the need to post this article knowing damn well it would be a continuation of the recently locked thread is disrespectful to this forum and Bearpaw.

I agree. There's a reason the other one was shut down. Special thanks to JDHasty for reviving this hot mess.
:bash:

Due to the reason given of legal threats for removing the other thread I think this goes way past disrespectful.  I am very suprised this forum continues to let this individual have access knowing his actions may lead to legal headaches for them.

I am glad "other" sources are finally showing some interest in this story.

I also find the threatening this forum, and or members of this forum with lawsuits over this very telling about the individual doing the threatening.

See you can have all the money in the world and you can sue everyone who disagrees with you. If you are rich enough, you probably will win.

Does that make you right?

Not where I come from.

In your first few posts, you came on here insinuating (if not threatening) some people who post here with legal action.



I personally do not know either of you. if anyone should not be allowed to post, I would rather it be someone who has only brought threats of lawsuit to the forum, rather then someone who is a regular contributor who is passionately trying to ensure this whole issue does not get swept under the rug, just because the individual involved has money.

There is something called integrity, money can't buy it, and you can't silence people with threats, and  still hope to earn it.






Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: greenhead_killer on May 18, 2016, 11:32:07 AM
Well said alchase. I happened to see this same article on another hunting forum today. People are talking about it everywhere. Wonder if they will be charged too with putting their opinions online as well and sharing printed news??
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Gringo31 on May 18, 2016, 12:26:27 PM
See how easy this would have gone if all of the rules were followed?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jkthomps on May 18, 2016, 03:36:30 PM
 :beatdeadhorse:

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jkthomps on May 18, 2016, 03:39:37 PM
Wait, wasn't "Bullwinkle" a moose?  :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 18, 2016, 03:47:34 PM
It's not over yet.  Anybody got a squirrel rifle handy? 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on May 18, 2016, 03:59:30 PM
Squirrel!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: ctwiggs1 on May 18, 2016, 04:12:54 PM
In my youth, I was blessed to be on several hound "hunts" to recollar cougar with the WDFW.  Some of the best memories of my teenage years!

I can tell you with full certainty that it doesn't even remotely compare to shooting an elk in the field.  There is a LOT of front end work that goes into hound hunting and it's not a walk in the park mid process either.

I will have to sample cougar meat sometime to see if I am willing to kill one or not though. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on May 18, 2016, 04:17:32 PM
In my youth, I was blessed to be on several hound "hunts" to recollar cougar with the WDFW.  Some of the best memories of my teenage years!

I can tell you with full certainty that it doesn't even remotely compare to shooting an elk in the field.  There is a LOT of front end work that goes into hound hunting and it's not a walk in the park mid process either.

I will have to sample cougar meat sometime to see if I am willing to kill one or not though.
It's delicious, you won't be disappointed.  Kind of like pork/chicken cross.  Great in stir fry with vegies over rice.  :drool:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: ctwiggs1 on May 18, 2016, 05:00:32 PM
Any idea where you can buy it commercially?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JJB11B on May 18, 2016, 05:09:55 PM
I find lots of cougars in dive bars, they normally taste like cigarettes and bloody Mary's to me
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: TVHunts on May 18, 2016, 05:26:16 PM
I find lots of cougars in dive bars, they normally taste like cigarettes and bloody Mary's to me
Awesome  :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jkthomps on May 18, 2016, 06:27:54 PM
I find lots of cougars in dive bars, they normally taste like cigarettes and bloody Mary's to me
😂 hahaha
Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: emac on May 18, 2016, 09:45:53 PM
I find lots of cougars in dive bars, they normally taste like cigarettes and bloody Mary's to me
Now that is funny poop right there

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jmscon on May 18, 2016, 11:03:01 PM
Just because this guy has contributed so much money to conservation should the state turn a blind eye to what he appears to have done? Just because he wins the auction doesn't mean there isn't someone else right behind him making a bid. The state will not suffer if this guy is convicted and can't bid on auctions, except for the court costs.

I have mixed feelings about the auction and raffle tags. I'm all for the auctions and the money it brings in. But the raffles, I've only bought tickets a couple of times and feel like the only time I'd have a chance would be if I spend a ton on tickets or if WDFW puts a limit on the number of tickets per person. I think that more people would buy in and offset the reduction from single people buying tons of tickets.

If he is convicted I hope they throw the book at him! If he is found innocent or makes a deal, I hope that the state can make conditions on his hunting privileges. If someone at WDFW gave him permission, that person should be canned and ticketed for aiding in illegal harvest!  :twocents:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Gringo31 on May 19, 2016, 07:21:55 AM
I find it funny that "some guy" comes on here to

1.  Straighten things out
2.  Says he won't say anything because it is an ongoing investigation.
3.  Says how many people will be served or sued for things they have said.
 
and my favorite

4.  Throws out a person's name from WDFW who HE says is to blame.....   :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: ctwiggs1 on May 19, 2016, 07:25:18 AM
I find it funny that "some guy" comes on here to

1.  Straighten things out
2.  Says he won't say anything because it is an ongoing investigation.
3.  Says how many people will be served or sued for things they have said.
 
and my favorite

4.  Throws out a person's name from WDFW who HE says is to blame.....   :chuckle:

What's the internet good for if not for acting tough?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bango skank on May 19, 2016, 07:54:59 AM
I find it funny that "some guy" comes on here to

1.  Straighten things out
2.  Says he won't say anything because it is an ongoing investigation.
3.  Says how many people will be served or sued for things they have said.
 
and my favorite

4.  Throws out a person's name from WDFW who HE says is to blame.....   :chuckle:

What's the internet good for if not for acting tough?

Porn
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: justyhntr on May 19, 2016, 11:07:42 AM
I find it funny that "some guy" comes on here to

1.  Straighten things out
2.  Says he won't say anything because it is an ongoing investigation.
3.  Says how many people will be served or sued for things they have said.
 
and my favorite

4.  Throws out a person's name from WDFW who HE says is to blame.....   :chuckle:

What's the internet good for if not for acting tough?

Porn
My favorite are the photos and comments by Ms. Information .  :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: pianoman9701 on May 19, 2016, 11:28:34 AM
Any idea where you can buy it commercially?

There's a Cambodian guy in Pierce Co. who would probably sell you some.  8)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: pianoman9701 on May 19, 2016, 11:36:02 AM
Well actually, I have to say, I was glad that someone posted a link to the Yakima Herald article. I may not have seen it otherwise. I probably would have posted it myself if I had come across it first. This is also being discussed on Facebook and I'm sure there are comments being posted in the Yakima Herald as well.

thanks for the link to the article. I find it interesting how this one animal and hunter has created such a stir... from a different perspective, this person has probably put into WA state conservation (financially) MORE than this entire site full of hunters combine since just 2007. I don't know him, his ethics, or how rich he is either.. This animal was a conservation tool, used to draw money from us all for a chance of a lifetime, one ticket ever year for me too! Ethics and location maybe not so much. In the end, the money this one hunter has given has most likely made a direct impact in WA and now, the state will waste most of it (i bet) toward litigation and investigation fees. Why not just fix the book to allow this to occur, after all, these raffles and auction tags are just designed to make conservation dollars as I am led to understand in all the writings right? One draw, one animal, one hunter? Is it really that bad that this old rich dude paid to play or are we just jealous and casting stones?
Again, just considering the gain from all the moneys invested, not the ethical hunting of one man position. I find it more appalling when a person of this financial affluence takes the route of posting up a 100K piece of property his millionaire buddies to hunt and not giving back, don't you?

So should he also be able to shoot a Record Book Roosevelt in Grays Harbor, Lewis or Pacific County?  If not why not?  Here, let me answer that for ya:  Because that South Central Washington - Big Game Raffle Tag is not good there.  WTH is so hard to figure out about that.

Now, re: the "Bullwinkle" aspects of this - just because something is legal, is it a smart thing to do?   Well, irrespective of the legal issues, Scott Sandsberry was talking with residents and property owners all around the area who had absolutely no idea that any law was broken.   They were PO'd, and they thought that shooting this bull was wrong and they were talking to Scott Sandsberry about why they thought it was wrong, but they had no idea that the tag he used to kill the bull with came with this restriction: 
South Central Washington - Big Game $ 17.00 per ticket
Elk: Any 300 or 500 series GMU open to elk hunting except GMUs not open to branch antlered bull elk hunting
http://wdfw.wa.gov/hunting/permits/raffles/index.html   

again I don't agree with the whole thing he did. was just saying that he definitely has contributed large sums to the state and now they will just use it up in court proceedings. reviews show suspect activities since 2007, why blame just him? allowing continued contributions from 2007 forward is frankly a state swing and a miss. since this raffle and auction is all about the money, the state WDFW didn't step in and prevent his participation after past adjudicated activity. To me, its not hard to understand JD, my point was either they (state) cares or they are just going thru motions, he was as I understand, forced off lands for a couple years by courts after 2007/8 raffle/auction tag episode yet still allowed to throw money into the state hoppers and participate in follow on auctions and raffles, that was the major state miss. Now, the state industry will waste money, not using it for conservation in this process. This person has as I read in articles, a fairly unlimited resources to dip from, how much will the state spend to pursue him? I would think that WDFW raffles and auctions programs could restrict individual participation and everyone moves on and conservation dollars are used for conservation. I get it upsets everyone here, myself included, but I blame more than the act or individual here...

...then your blame is misplaced. All due respects, Birddogdad, it's like blaming "an atmosphere of violence" to justify a gangsta's murdering someone. He knew the rules, probably better than anyone else, especially since he'd been bitten before. You blame the crime on the criminal.
Title: Who's Responsibility Is It?
Post by: JDHasty on May 19, 2016, 12:05:53 PM
Well actually, I have to say, I was glad that someone posted a link to the Yakima Herald article. I may not have seen it otherwise. I probably would have posted it myself if I had come across it first. This is also being discussed on Facebook and I'm sure there are comments being posted in the Yakima Herald as well.

thanks for the link to the article. I find it interesting how this one animal and hunter has created such a stir... from a different perspective, this person has probably put into WA state conservation (financially) MORE than this entire site full of hunters combine since just 2007. I don't know him, his ethics, or how rich he is either.. This animal was a conservation tool, used to draw money from us all for a chance of a lifetime, one ticket ever year for me too! Ethics and location maybe not so much. In the end, the money this one hunter has given has most likely made a direct impact in WA and now, the state will waste most of it (i bet) toward litigation and investigation fees. Why not just fix the book to allow this to occur, after all, these raffles and auction tags are just designed to make conservation dollars as I am led to understand in all the writings right? One draw, one animal, one hunter? Is it really that bad that this old rich dude paid to play or are we just jealous and casting stones?
Again, just considering the gain from all the moneys invested, not the ethical hunting of one man position. I find it more appalling when a person of this financial affluence takes the route of posting up a 100K piece of property his millionaire buddies to hunt and not giving back, don't you?

So should he also be able to shoot a Record Book Roosevelt in Grays Harbor, Lewis or Pacific County?  If not why not?  Here, let me answer that for ya:  Because that South Central Washington - Big Game Raffle Tag is not good there.  WTH is so hard to figure out about that.

Now, re: the "Bullwinkle" aspects of this - just because something is legal, is it a smart thing to do?   Well, irrespective of the legal issues, Scott Sandsberry was talking with residents and property owners all around the area who had absolutely no idea that any law was broken.   They were PO'd, and they thought that shooting this bull was wrong and they were talking to Scott Sandsberry about why they thought it was wrong, but they had no idea that the tag he used to kill the bull with came with this restriction: 
South Central Washington - Big Game $ 17.00 per ticket
Elk: Any 300 or 500 series GMU open to elk hunting except GMUs not open to branch antlered bull elk hunting
http://wdfw.wa.gov/hunting/permits/raffles/index.html   

again I don't agree with the whole thing he did. was just saying that he definitely has contributed large sums to the state and now they will just use it up in court proceedings. reviews show suspect activities since 2007, why blame just him? allowing continued contributions from 2007 forward is frankly a state swing and a miss. since this raffle and auction is all about the money, the state WDFW didn't step in and prevent his participation after past adjudicated activity. To me, its not hard to understand JD, my point was either they (state) cares or they are just going thru motions, he was as I understand, forced off lands for a couple years by courts after 2007/8 raffle/auction tag episode yet still allowed to throw money into the state hoppers and participate in follow on auctions and raffles, that was the major state miss. Now, the state industry will waste money, not using it for conservation in this process. This person has as I read in articles, a fairly unlimited resources to dip from, how much will the state spend to pursue him? I would think that WDFW raffles and auctions programs could restrict individual participation and everyone moves on and conservation dollars are used for conservation. I get it upsets everyone here, myself included, but I blame more than the act or individual here...

...then your blame is misplaced. All due respects, Birddogdad, it's like blaming "an atmosphere of violence" to justify a gangsta's murdering someone. He knew the rules, probably better than anyone else, especially since he'd been bitten before. You blame the crime on the criminal.

There are kids as young as eight and nine in Hunter Education classes every session.  Who's responsibility is it to know the rules?  -  is one of the questions that are asked every session and I have yet to hear a student not get this one right.  When an instructor asks that question hands go up or students blurt out "It is my responsibility."
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on May 19, 2016, 12:17:56 PM
I find it funny that "some guy" comes on here to

1.  Straighten things out
2.  Says he won't say anything because it is an ongoing investigation.
3.  Says how many people will be served or sued for things they have said.
 
and my favorite

4.  Throws out a person's name from WDFW who HE says is to blame.....   :chuckle:

Not sure what's funny about that? And I didn't just throw out a name. I gave the name of the officer that gave clear permission to shoot the bull knowing exactly where it was at. If you think that's funny or something that's your rigbt.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 19, 2016, 12:25:57 PM
I find it funny that "some guy" comes on here to

1.  Straighten things out
2.  Says he won't say anything because it is an ongoing investigation.
3.  Says how many people will be served or sued for things they have said.
 
and my favorite

4.  Throws out a person's name from WDFW who HE says is to blame.....   :chuckle:

Not sure what's funny about that? And I didn't just throw out a name. I gave the name of the officer that gave clear permission to shoot the bull knowing exactly where it was at. If you think that's funny or something that's your rigbt.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: teanawayslayer on May 19, 2016, 12:27:20 PM
I find it funny that "some guy" comes on here to

1.  Straighten things out
2.  Says he won't say anything because it is an ongoing investigation.
3.  Says how many people will be served or sued for things they have said.
 
and my favorite

4.  Throws out a person's name from WDFW who HE says is to blame.....   :chuckle:

Not sure what's funny about that? And I didn't just throw out a name. I gave the name of the officer that gave clear permission to shoot the bull knowing exactly where it was at. If you think that's funny or something that's your rigbt.
so why would a guy that sent the case the the prosecutors office send it there if there were no laws violated? Oh wait that's right you don't want to talk about the case!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on May 19, 2016, 12:38:48 PM
I find it funny that "some guy" comes on here to

1.  Straighten things out
2.  Says he won't say anything because it is an ongoing investigation.
3.  Says how many people will be served or sued for things they have said.
 
and my favorite

4.  Throws out a person's name from WDFW who HE says is to blame.....   :chuckle:

Not sure what's funny about that? And I didn't just throw out a name. I gave the name of the officer that gave clear permission to shoot the bull knowing exactly where it was at. If you think that's funny or something that's your rigbt.

Seems unlikely someone with a tag link that would risk a chance of getting in trouble at least you'd hope not

I'm not going to comment on any details while this case is open  or before the person on this forum gets served. I will tell you great steps were taken to do the right thing.

And the right thing was?  :chuckle:

Welcome to the site. Pretty big first couple of posts.

And who is getting served if you don't mind me asking.

Thank you for the welcome.  I signed up to this forum to hopefully clear things up some. There has been a lot of false information posted on this site. A call was made to the game department asking if it was ok to shoot the bull where it located. After Morgan Grant from the game department checked into it another phone conversation took place and the hunters were told they absolutely could harvest that bull with that tag at that location. If in fact the info given was wrong the game department is the one to be blamed.

As for the person on here that will be dealing with legal issues, I can't tell you who that is at this point. But if you read the thread on this topic that was removed it would be really easy for you to guess who.

Hopefully your info is accurate. Wouldn't want Mr. Grant filing a lawsuit against you.
:tup:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 19, 2016, 12:39:57 PM
I find it funny that "some guy" comes on here to

1.  Straighten things out
2.  Says he won't say anything because it is an ongoing investigation.
3.  Says how many people will be served or sued for things they have said.
 
and my favorite

4.  Throws out a person's name from WDFW who HE says is to blame.....   :chuckle:

Not sure what's funny about that? And I didn't just throw out a name. I gave the name of the officer that gave clear permission to shoot the bull knowing exactly where it was at. If you think that's funny or something that's your rigbt.

Seems unlikely someone with a tag link that would risk a chance of getting in trouble at least you'd hope not

I'm not going to comment on any details while this case is open  or before the person on this forum gets served. I will tell you great steps were taken to do the right thing.

And the right thing was?  :chuckle:

Welcome to the site. Pretty big first couple of posts.

And who is getting served if you don't mind me asking.

Thank you for the welcome.  I signed up to this forum to hopefully clear things up some. There has been a lot of false information posted on this site. A call was made to the game department asking if it was ok to shoot the bull where it located. After Morgan Grant from the game department checked into it another phone conversation took place and the hunters were told they absolutely could harvest that bull with that tag at that location. If in fact the info given was wrong the game department is the one to be blamed.

As for the person on here that will be dealing with legal issues, I can't tell you who that is at this point. But if you read the thread on this topic that was removed it would be really easy for you to guess who.

Hopefully your info is accurate. Wouldn't want Mr. Grant filing a lawsuit against you.
:tup:

 :tup:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 2MANY on May 19, 2016, 01:07:14 PM
"A call was made to the game department asking if it was ok to shoot the bull where it located. After Morgan Grant from the game department checked into it another phone conversation took place and the hunters were told they absolutely could harvest that bull with that tag at that location."

This crap just makes me shake my head.
WHAT A HUNT!!!!!!
Cue in phone ringing, guy answering, take em Elmer, Bang!!!

An elk hunt?????????
Yea right.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Gringo31 on May 19, 2016, 01:10:14 PM
Quote
Not sure what's funny about that? And I didn't just throw out a name. I gave the name of the officer that gave clear permission to shoot the bull knowing exactly where it was at. If you think that's funny or something that's your right.

Let me explain a bit further why I've exercised my right to find this funny...

You said

Quote
I'm not going to comment on any details while this case is open  
and
Quote
I haven't and won't say anything that will have any effect on either issue.

So.....you won't say anything, but then you used a persons full real name on why you feel is to blame.

Yep..... I still find that funny  :chuckle:

In the mean time, keep telling everyone that they are going to get sued, that they shouldn't say anything..... while clearly you don't walk your talk.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on May 19, 2016, 01:57:47 PM
Quote from: link=topic=195504.msg2591551#msg2591551 date=1463327889
Quote from: link=topic=195504.msg2591550#msg2591550 date=1463327674
Quote from: link=topic=195504.msg2591499#msg2591499 date=1463321301
There has been a lot of false information posted on this site. A call was made to the game department asking if it was ok to shoot the bull where it located. After Morgan Grant from the game department checked into it another phone conversation took place and the hunters were told they absolutely could harvest that bull with that tag at that location.

 Has anyone contacted this guy to confirm this?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: pianoman9701 on May 19, 2016, 02:02:56 PM
Well, this is all very dramatic. Do we know the name of the person who spoke with Mr. Grant? Is it possible he's a "guide" who does a lot of celebrity guiding? This could explain a lot.  :chuckle: :chuckle: It's really fun, you know, until someone puts an eye out!!! :yike:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: idahohuntr on May 19, 2016, 02:44:44 PM
I find it funny that "some guy" comes on here to

1.  Straighten things out
2.  Says he won't say anything because it is an ongoing investigation.
3.  Says how many people will be served or sued for things they have said.
 
and my favorite

4.  Throws out a person's name from WDFW who HE says is to blame.....   :chuckle:

Not sure what's funny about that? And I didn't just throw out a name. I gave the name of the officer that gave clear permission to shoot the bull knowing exactly where it was at. If you think that's funny or something that's your rigbt.
Why did you call the game department to ask if you knew exactly which unit the bull was located?  What about the regulations caused you concern that you were hunting in a closed unit and needed an officers clarification or permission - the latter for which he does not have authority? 

Bet you wish you had just went and hunted somewhere else now don't you  :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 19, 2016, 02:57:53 PM
From the start this was never going to end well. 

Very early on I  was in downtown Ellensburg having a burger with friends, a local Kittitas Valley guy said:  What were they thinking  -  Is this guy trying to be this year's recipient of the Dr Walter Palmer DDS Lifetime Achievement Award in the Patio Elk category?

I just can't get my mind around how anyone could have gotten the notion in their head that this scheme was viable.   

 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on May 19, 2016, 04:22:21 PM
Man, same debacle, different thread. :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Alchase on May 19, 2016, 06:20:50 PM
I find it funny that "some guy" comes on here to

1.  Straighten things out
2.  Says he won't say anything because it is an ongoing investigation.
3.  Says how many people will be served or sued for things they have said.
 
and my favorite

4.  Throws out a person's name from WDFW who HE says is to blame.....   :chuckle:

Not sure what's funny about that? And I didn't just throw out a name. I gave the name of the officer that gave clear permission to shoot the bull knowing exactly where it was at. If you think that's funny or something that's your rigbt.

Wait one minute ............. Ok I have my BS boots on, continue

Or would you rather just threaten me with a lawsuit as well?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jjhunter on May 19, 2016, 06:23:00 PM
Soooo.....

Super Trooper gave the kill order?   :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Whitenuckles on May 19, 2016, 06:35:36 PM
 This guy should be charged with a FELONY! No more hunting, no more guns!

Makes me sick. What a pathetic excuse for a man.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Colville on May 19, 2016, 06:52:12 PM
Can someone point me to the RCW or WDFW enacting legislation that grants WDFW enforcement officers the authority to suspend, temporarily or situationally, the issued regulations of the department?

Oh, and is there anything but a "he said" that mr Grant gave his permission verbally? Anything that documents his action? Recording? Text? Email? 

Assuming this permission could be documented, it seems to me it would only be evidence that the Sgt and the hunter should both be prosecuted, rather than a basis that the hunter is without fault. If a police officer gives me "permission" to steal a car, I'm pretty sure I'm still going to jail if another officer arrests me for it.  Primarily because I don't hear anyone claiming that the legality was in question, only whether or not they tried to get someone to give them extrajudicial Okee Dokee.

Feel free to correct me if that's wrong. But I have seen nothing that suggests that anyone misunderstood the unit the game was in or if it had any branch antlered season that would make it open to the tag holder.  I'd have a slightly different opinion if someone was making a reasonable claim that the unit location was unclear or that a reg was ambiguous and they needed WDFW to clear it up, haven't seen that.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 19, 2016, 07:42:27 PM
Here's another story.

http://www.wideopenspaces.com/high-profile-hunter-shoots-famous-elk-in-restricted-pasture-outrage-follows/
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Miles on May 19, 2016, 07:45:17 PM
Sounds like the same story.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 19, 2016, 07:48:21 PM
Sounds like the same story.

Looks like it is based on the Yakima Herald story.  A friend sent me the link, I have never heard of that website.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Alchase on May 19, 2016, 07:58:32 PM
LOL,
list of people they will have to sue gets longer every day.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Buckmark on May 19, 2016, 08:04:20 PM
A LEO officer whether preset or on the phone can not change then law, he or she can not change the law, rules, rcw's or reg's on the fly..
They can not issue someone the right to circumnavigate the rules, laws, game regs etc and the time....

My friend the WSP can not tell, me it's ok to drive home drunk no more than a WDFW Officer can tell someone it is ok to shoot an animal in a area closed to that for everyone....sorry but i call BS. It is not a judgment call or an interpretation,  the hunter was in an area where it was not legal and no matter what some paid LEO told him it was not legal!!!!


Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 19, 2016, 08:10:39 PM
That Wideopenspaces story was not posted by a fan of Todd Reichert.  I had to go downstairs to read it, it kept crashing my old beater of an iPad.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Skillet on May 19, 2016, 08:53:42 PM
A LEO officer whether preset or on the phone can not change then law, he or she can not change the law, rules, rcw's or reg's on the fly..
They can not issue someone the right to circumnavigate the rules, laws, game regs etc and the time....

My friend the WSP can not tell, me it's ok to drive home drunk no more than a WDFW Officer can tell someone it is ok to shoot an animal in a area closed to that for everyone....sorry but i call BS. It is not a judgment call or an interpretation,  the hunter was in an area where it was not legal and no matter what some paid LEO told him it was not legal!!!!

This is all very true, BUT -
The punishment will depend on how naive the judge is, and how much of a "I'm just a dumb old hunter" face the defendant can hang on his head. 

In a completely unrelated train of thought, the fact that one of the worst known poachers in Washington history, Bona Bunphoath, got only 30 days community service and 60 days home detention just popped into my head.  Not sure why.  :dunno:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bean Counter on May 19, 2016, 08:56:25 PM
This guy should be charged with a FELONY! No more hunting, no more guns!

Makes me sick. What a pathetic excuse for a man.

Sorry but you lose people like me here. This is where I get off the train.

Voting restrictions, long prison time, and firearms removal ought be reserved for the most heinous in society: child molesters, murderers, Liberals, etc.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bango skank on May 19, 2016, 09:05:41 PM
Can someone point me to the RCW or WDFW enacting legislation that grants WDFW enforcement officers the authority to suspend, temporarily or situationally, the issued regulations of the department?

Oh, and is there anything but a "he said" that mr Grant gave his permission verbally? Anything that documents his action? Recording? Text? Email? 

Assuming this permission could be documented, it seems to me it would only be evidence that the Sgt and the hunter should both be prosecuted, rather than a basis that the hunter is without fault. If a police officer gives me "permission" to steal a car, I'm pretty sure I'm still going to jail if another officer arrests me for it.  Primarily because I don't hear anyone claiming that the legality was in question, only whether or not they tried to get someone to give them extrajudicial Okee Dokee.

Feel free to correct me if that's wrong. But I have seen nothing that suggests that anyone misunderstood the unit the game was in or if it had any branch antlered season that would make it open to the tag holder.  I'd have a slightly different opinion if someone was making a reasonable claim that the unit location was unclear or that a reg was ambiguous and they needed WDFW to clear it up, haven't seen that.

Well said.  Pretty much what i wanted to say, but i lacked the motivation to carefully consider my words enough to put them together as coherently and maturely.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Whitenuckles on May 19, 2016, 09:17:19 PM
This guy should be charged with a FELONY! No more hunting, no more guns!

Makes me sick. What a pathetic excuse for a man.

Sorry but you lose people like me here. This is where I get off the train.

Voting restrictions, long prison time, and firearms removal ought be reserved for the most heinous in society: child molesters, murderers, Liberals, etc.
If the guy broke the law while hunting and using a firearm, and supposably multiple times. He absolutely should NOT have the right and privilege to do it again.  :twocents:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bean Counter on May 19, 2016, 10:00:58 PM
Hmm.. Well to me, if something is a right, it is NOT a privilege. The RKBA is a right. Ergo it must never be looked at as a privilege. I reject the notion that hunting is a privilege but absent a constitutional amendment defining it as a right then its a matter of state law where most call it a privilege. Restrict it as you will according to the legislative process--I don't want to see people go to prison for a single animal involving a first time offense. Big fines? Maybe. Prison time? Not agreeing to that. Just my :twocents:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Whitenuckles on May 19, 2016, 10:21:05 PM
Hmm.. Well to me, if something is a right, it is NOT a privilege. The RKBA is a right. Ergo it must never be looked at as a privilege. I reject the notion that hunting is a privilege but absent a constitutional amendment defining it as a right then its a matter of state law where most call it a privilege. Restrict it as you will according to the legislative process--I don't want to see people go to prison for a single animal involving a first time offense. Big fines? Maybe. Prison time? Not agreeing to that. Just my :twocents:


*censored* I see no difference here. I personally think that the life of a bull is worth more than money.

 But, like I said, I see your side of it too. ;)
 


(unsubstantiated claim removed)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: mfswallace on May 19, 2016, 10:24:31 PM
Hmm.. Well to me, if something is a right, it is NOT a privilege. The RKBA is a right. Ergo it must never be looked at as a privilege. I reject the notion that hunting is a privilege but absent a constitutional amendment defining it as a right then its a matter of state law where most call it a privilege. Restrict it as you will according to the legislative process--I don't want to see people go to prison for a single animal involving a first time offense. Big fines? Maybe. Prison time? Not agreeing to that. Just my :twocents:

Not his first rodeo :o
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Whitenuckles on May 19, 2016, 10:30:04 PM
Hmm.. Well to me, if something is a right, it is NOT a privilege. The RKBA is a right. Ergo it must never be looked at as a privilege. I reject the notion that hunting is a privilege but absent a constitutional amendment defining it as a right then its a matter of state law where most call it a privilege. Restrict it as you will according to the legislative process--I don't want to see people go to prison for a single animal involving a first time offense. Big fines? Maybe. Prison time? Not agreeing to that. Just my :twocents:

Not his first rodeo :o

*censored*


(unsubstantiated claim removed)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bean Counter on May 19, 2016, 10:37:17 PM
My opinions are general in nature and aren't necessarily a perspective on this particular case.

Organized, commercial poaching rings and repeat offenders should have the heat turned up.  :twocents:  IDK whether that's this case or not.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bearpaw on May 20, 2016, 01:29:16 AM
I don't see a problem with citing other news stories or discussing this issue. The last topic was removed due to unsubstantiated accusations that were potentially slanderous, we were asked to remove the topic or risk legal action. If you want this topic to remain on the forum please do not post unsubstantiated accusations or forum management will be forced to remove the topic.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 20, 2016, 05:30:49 AM
OK, here are some facts that one individual who is involved in this latest case would rather you not know, but are easily validated by going online?

1 - Todd Reichert hired Helicopter services in 2007
2 - Todd Reichert plead guilty in 2012 to having lied about having paid Jon Wick to take him to an elk
3 - The helicopter was used by Jon Wick for spotting elk from the air w/in 24 hours his clandestine (see above Todd Reichert did not want anyone to know he was Wick's client) hunting.

http://www.lagrandeobserver.com/csp/mediapool/sites/LaGrandeObserver/LocalState/story.csp?cid=4089345&sid=824&fid=151

to be continued...


 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: popeshawnpaul on May 20, 2016, 07:51:24 AM
So we now have proposed valid info informing that WDFW officer Grant and other WDFW actors reportedly authorized the harvest of this elk.  How does this play out legally?  Here is the appropriate statute:

RCW 77.15.010
Exemption for department actions.
A person is not guilty of a crime under this chapter if the person is an officer, employee, or agent of the department lawfully acting in the course of his or her authorized duties.
[ 1998 c 190 § 2.]


He isn't an employee and probably not an agent of the department acting in the course of their duties.  If he doesn't fall under that statute, then how would this play out?  Intent.  Do you need intent for Unlawful Big Game Hunting?  Or is it strict liability like a speeding ticket?

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.


Intent is not specifically enumerated in the statute.  Is it implied?  What does "takes" mean under subsection (1)(a)?  If I hit this elk on the road have I taken it?  Did I intend to take it?  If I fall a tree on my property and it hits the elk have I "taken" it?  If I put a coyote trap out on my property and it accidentally kills this elk have I hunted or taken it?  Would I be prosecuted for it or not?  Does intent only matter if a prosecutor is looking to charge the case?

Can the attorney get this jury instruction in somehow on this case?

WPIC 10.01 Intent—Intentionally—Definition
A person acts with intent or intentionally when acting with the objective or purpose to accomplish a result that constitutes a crime.


It seems difficult.  Or if not, is the strategy to argue to the jury the WDFW authorized this and it's not the defendant's fault.  It would essentially be a nullification argument and would need to be carefully made by counsel as you are not allowed to argue nullification in WA under our law.  These are the interesting thoughts I have and what I will be looking for.  Or does the nullification get argued with the prosecutor to cut a deal?  Any prosecutor going into this trial would know this is going to be a likely defense and does that sway them from going for the conviction?  Or is the strategy to prolong the case past September when the 2016 raffle tag can be used and then plea to the charge knowing the defendant won't hunt for a few years and will go to Africa or Canada or something?  Time will tell...
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Shawn Ryan on May 20, 2016, 09:58:09 AM
Shawn, since 1(a) is disjunctive, I would not quibble over the definition of "take."  "Hunt" and "possess" are sufficient and much harder for the defendant to state that he did neither. Further, 1(a) and 1(b) are also disjunctive and the violations alleged are what are enumerated in 1(a) and (b).

State v. Stoken seems to hold that "knowing" is the standard and the Court of Appeals had no trouble finding that "knowing" applies to the act of hunting or possessing, not to the defendant's state of mind regarding violating the law.  Further, the Court of Appeals found that "whether [the] hunting season was open"... "is a question of fact."

I've yet to see a legal reason for a deal.  Efficient use of court resources might lead a deal, but maybe not. There might be some court house conversation between the visiting judge, the prosecutor, and J. Chmelewski, who might just have an opinion about the case since she reportedly gave the elk his name while he was living on her land.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on May 20, 2016, 10:22:16 AM
Here's a letter from a Kittitas County resident:

http://www.dailyrecordnews.com/members/letter-as-a-hunter-disgusted-with-killing-of-bullwinkle/article_af72f16e-1e09-11e6-af5a-134c6e038aed.html


Letter: As a hunter, disgusted with killing of Bullwinkle

    Jan Osmonovich 19 hrs ago (1)

To the Editor:

As a county resident and avid elk hunter, I am so outraged and disgusted with all those involved in the shooting of “Bullwinkle” by Mr. Reichert.

This is a man who has used his fortune to buy hunting tags in several states and used his money to pay his way to be able to shoot “trophy” elk yearly. This is the sort of activity that has given hunting such a bad reputation nationwide.

This elk was a local celebrity, in a GMU that did not allow branched antler permits and yet Mr. Reichert not only shot the elk, but had help to move it to the adjoining GMU which was covered by his tag. The fact that this is not his first illegal kill, that he has simply bought his way out of previous charges, and gone on his merry way to purchase new “raffle” tags.

When the raffle system first started in this state, those of us who are law-abiding hunters knew that this would become a rich man’s ticket. The fact that Mr. Reichert has purchased tags year after year and that the WDFW and RMEF condoned this because he added many dollars to their “coffers” is disgusting.

I hope that Mr. Reichert is not able to buy his way out of this situation and that plea bargaining is not an option here in Kittitas County.

I know that the locals who have enjoyed the presence of Bullwinkle for years have to be as sickened as I am with this situation.

The norm for this should apply to Mr. Reichert, seizing his weapons, the pickup he used to transport the elk to the next GMU, and his hunting privileges for life. Harsh? I don’t think so. Justified? You bet.

Unfortunately, he will more than likely get off with a plea bargain and once again, buy his way out. I guess I am hoping that the legal system in Kittitas County will not allow a plea bargain for this repeat offender and hold him legally responsible for his actions and revoke his hunting privileges in this state for life.

Wishful thinking? I hope not. As an ethical hunter and county resident, I hope not.

Jan Osmonovich

Cle Elum


Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Coastal_native on May 20, 2016, 10:42:48 AM
My opinions are general in nature and aren't necessarily a perspective on this particular case.

Organized, commercial poaching rings and repeat offenders should have the heat turned up.  :twocents:  IDK whether that's this case or not.

I'm with you on this one.  I have a hard putting the alleged offense in the same category as those that I feel deserve the harshest penalties.  If this had been any other over the counter tag purchased by a blue collared person and the same offenses were being alleged, I don't think we'd even know about it.  He's rich and the elk was a local celebrity...seems to be driving it.  With as many hunters as we talk about (and witness) testing limits and breaking the game laws (antler restrictions, legal boundaries, legal hunting hours, legal hunting equipment, etc...), I'm having a hard time not putting this in the same category as someone who shoots an illegal animal and tries to convince himself and everyone else that it was "borderline" legal from his perspective.  Although, I probably won't be surprised either way. 

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 20, 2016, 11:18:59 AM
"In December 2007, Reichert killed a trophy elk in the Umatilla National Forest with Wick's assistance outside the area the Forest Service had authorized Wick to provide outfitter-guiding services."

"Reichert hired Wick, who operated an outfitter-guiding service known as Outback Outfitters, to provide outfitter-guiding services for the hunt."

"Reichert also hired a helicopter service that Wick used to spot elk in aide of the hunt, which is unlawful in Washington State."

"Reichert later falsely claimed that Wick had provided no professional services during the hunt or been paid any money for his services."

http://www.spokesman.com/blogs/outdoors/2012/jul/23/trophy-elk-hunter-tagged-lying-hiring-helicopter/

"According to Micheal C. Ormsby, U.S. Attorney for Eastern District of Washington, Reichert bought the 2007 Eastside any-elk Governor’s Auction Tag for around $47,000.  He hired Wick to provide guide services for his hunt, and apparently just to make sure, also hired a helicopter to spot animals — illegal in Washington."

 

Here is the Reichert side of the story as published in his hometown paper:

A headline and story published on July 21, 2012, incorrectly suggested that Salkum resident Tod Reichert pleaded guilty to illegal hunting activity in connection with a 2007 hunt in the Umatilla National Forest. In fact, Reichert’s plea deal only involved him admitting to providing information that ended up being false during a law enforcement investigation of a commercial guiding service. At the time Reichert made the first statement in question, he believed it was true, and the other statement was made in sarcastic frustration with the manner in which he was being questioned by federal officers, according to his Spokane attorney, Steve Hormel. Reichert did not admit to illegal hunting, and all federal charges related to accusations of illegal hunting activities were dropped. Reichert harvested the bull elk legally in December 2007. Reichert and his guide used a helicopter to track the elk the day before the hunt; prosecutors’ claims that this was illegal were dropped. Hunting regulations on the issue are ambiguous, Reichert said. He notes that the state hunting guide that year included an advertisement for an aerial scouting service, further reinforcing his belief that he was acting legally. “I sincerely believed I could hire a helicopter because of the way the regulations were written in the official hunting rules,” Reichert said in a statement provided by his attorney. “I have always worked to hunt legally. I have a great respect for the animals and the law.”

http://www.chronline.com/records/corrections-hunting-in-umatilla-national-forest-death-notice-misspelling/article_e9372910-8b36-11e2-a800-0019bb2963f4.html

OK, so Mr Reichert hired Wick, and Mr Reichert hired a helicopter service AND Wick used the helicopter service to spot elk in aid of the hunt and then Reichert later falsely claimed that Wick had provided no professional services during the hunt or been paid any money for his services.

But... Mr Reichert sincerely believed he could hire a helicopter because of the way the regulations were written in the official hunting rules....

Really???

 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on May 20, 2016, 11:24:24 AM
I believe that he could have thought the helicopter was legal.  I do remember the ad in the regulations for hiring a helicopter.  I'd even given it some thought (not serious thought, but a little thought) about using a helicopter to access some land for elk hunting. :twocents:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 20, 2016, 11:27:48 AM
I believe that he could have thought the helicopter was legal.  I do remember the ad in the regulations for hiring a helicopter.  I'd even given it some thought (not serious thought, but a little thought) about using a helicopter to access some land for elk hunting. :twocents:

There are also ads for four wheelers in the Game Regs, does that introduce any confusion regarding the legality of operating them on Green Dot roads? 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 20, 2016, 11:31:46 AM
Th quote Scooby Doo:  Ruht Roh!

http://www.nbcrightnow.com/story/32020046/photos-bullwinkle-the-ellensburg-elk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on May 20, 2016, 11:32:20 AM
I believe that he could have thought the helicopter was legal.  I do remember the ad in the regulations for hiring a helicopter.  I'd even given it some thought (not serious thought, but a little thought) about using a helicopter to access some land for elk hunting. :twocents:

There are also ads for four wheelers in the Game Regs, does that introduce any confusion regarding the legality of operating them on Green Dot roads?

No.  But I think the green dot road rules were/are very clear.  I didn't get the impression that the flying rules were that clear (or easy to find).  :dunno:  I just think it is possible to give the guy the benefit of the doubt in the helicopter deal.

The bullwinkle case, I still can't understand why he would even want to shoot a tame elk (and in a closed unit).  Why even ask for permission to shoot him when it was obviously illegal?   :dunno:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bango skank on May 20, 2016, 11:36:05 AM
I believe that he could have thought the helicopter was legal.  I do remember the ad in the regulations for hiring a helicopter.  I'd even given it some thought (not serious thought, but a little thought) about using a helicopter to access some land for elk hunting. :twocents:

There are also ads for four wheelers in the Game Regs, does that introduce any confusion regarding the legality of operating them on Green Dot roads?

No.  But I think the green dot road rules were/are very clear.  I didn't get the impression that the flying rules were that clear (or easy to find).  :dunno:  I just think it is possible to give the guy the benefit of the doubt in the helicopter deal.

The bullwinkle case, I still can't understand why he would even want to shoot a tame elk (and in a closed unit).  Why even ask for permission to shoot him when it was obviously illegal?   :dunno:

This guy has a history of claiming not to understand rules that are pretty universally understood by others.  If hes as dumb as he tries to act, why not show the regs to his lawyer and consult him before the fact?  Probably because he knows damn good and well what the answer will be.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on May 20, 2016, 11:38:02 AM
So, he plead guilty and was convicted of lying? And not poaching or wildlife related offense for the 2007 offense?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: turbo on May 20, 2016, 11:38:15 AM
Are we all getting sued now? "IF" this is all true.... What a loser hunter. Disgusting!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 20, 2016, 11:41:03 AM
I believe that he could have thought the helicopter was legal.  I do remember the ad in the regulations for hiring a helicopter.  I'd even given it some thought (not serious thought, but a little thought) about using a helicopter to access some land for elk hunting. :twocents:

There are also ads for four wheelers in the Game Regs, does that introduce any confusion regarding the legality of operating them on Green Dot roads?

No.  But I think the green dot road rules were/are very clear.  I didn't get the impression that the flying rules were that clear (or easy to find).  :dunno:  I just think it is possible to give the guy the benefit of the doubt in the helicopter deal.

The bullwinkle case, I still can't understand why he would even want to shoot a tame elk (and in a closed unit).  Why even ask for permission to shoot him when it was obviously illegal?   :dunno:

My buddy has an airplane we could have been flying out to the islands and hunting blacktails after work for decades and not have to pay the ferry fare.  The chances of spotting a trophy blacktail are pretty slim.  But the law was absolutely unambiguous to us.  But I do get your point.  I actually did give the benefit of the doubt re: Was Reichert aware of what Wick was doing w/the the helicopter? ... until this came up. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 20, 2016, 11:42:01 AM
So, he plead guilty and was convicted of lying? And not poaching or wildlife related offense for the 2007 offense?

Yes. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on May 20, 2016, 11:52:16 AM
Here's a "What If"........

What if a guy had an "any bull" permit for a neighboring GMU and he calls wdfw and asks "Hey, I have a "any bull" permit for GMU 328 but I see a real nice bull in GMU 334.  Can I go ahead and shoot that bull instead of finding one in 328?

I would hope the answer would be "no".......or a laugh followed by "hell no!".

But what if that same guy calls up and says "I have an 'any bull' permit and I see a bull in a firearm restricted area, can I go ahead and shoot him with my muzzleloader?" 

Well, then I could see the wdfw employee saying sure "a muzzleloader is allowed in a firearm restricted area".  The employee might not ask or connect the dots that the firearm restricted area is in the wrong GMU.

Could it have been an honest mistake?  :dunno:  I don't know.  Maybe.  Could the phone call to WDFW have been purposely stated to be misleading into getting permission?  I don't know........maybe.

The case is definitely interesting though.........and no jealousy at all here.   :hello:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: M_ray on May 20, 2016, 11:53:35 AM
Are we all getting sued now?

Yes kiticaashunter cleared this up for us  :rolleyes:


DISCLAIMER: The opinions expressed here are not those of HW Management, Admins, Mods or myself... But they are the opinions of Elvis who has revealed them to me through the medium of my pet hamster, Lee Harvey Oswald...
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on May 20, 2016, 11:53:59 AM
It will be interesting to find out (hopefully we will) what was asked of the wdfw employee and what his answer was.  :twocents:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 2MANY on May 20, 2016, 12:01:46 PM
From what I can see the temporary insanity defense might be appropriate in some cases.

It would appear some go crazy when they see hot women or ponder the thought of wrapping their hands around large bone.
They just cannot control themselves.

When the brain cannot control the bodies actions one could be termed........Temporarily Insane.

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: teanawayslayer on May 20, 2016, 12:07:57 PM
Here's a "What If"........

What if a guy had an "any bull" permit for a neighboring GMU and he calls wdfw and asks "Hey, I have a "any bull" permit for GMU 328 but I see a real nice bull in GMU 334.  Can I go ahead and shoot that bull instead of finding one in 328?

I would hope the answer would be "no".......or a laugh followed by "hell no!".

But what if that same guy calls up and says "I have an 'any bull' permit and I see a bull in a firearm restricted area, can I go ahead and shoot him with my muzzleloader?" 

Well, then I could see the wdfw employee saying sure "a muzzleloader is allowed in a firearm restricted area".  The employee might not ask or connect the dots that the firearm restricted area is in the wrong GMU.

Could it have been an honest mistake?  :dunno:  I don't know.  Maybe.  Could the phone call to WDFW have been purposely stated to be misleading into getting permission?  I don't know........maybe.

The case is definitely interesting though.........and no jealousy at all here.   :hello:
hypothetically there might have been several phone calls. Hypothetically many no's. Hypothetically many baiting questions to get a twisted answer  that someone wanted to hear. I don't know but I had a damage permit for my son. The land owner gave me the permit they recieved from the game department. Stating what unit and what weapon could be used. IT WAS IN WRITING! If it were me with the raffle tag and that was the bull I wanted I would have drove to Yakima to mr grant and had in writing that it was ok to shoot the bull. But that's just me.   :dunno:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: M_ray on May 20, 2016, 12:14:44 PM
Here's a "What If"........

What if a guy had an "any bull" permit for a neighboring GMU and he calls wdfw and asks "Hey, I have a "any bull" permit for GMU 328 but I see a real nice bull in GMU 334.  Can I go ahead and shoot that bull instead of finding one in 328?

I would hope the answer would be "no".......or a laugh followed by "hell no!".

But what if that same guy calls up and says "I have an 'any bull' permit and I see a bull in a firearm restricted area, can I go ahead and shoot him with my muzzleloader?" 

Well, then I could see the wdfw employee saying sure "a muzzleloader is allowed in a firearm restricted area".  The employee might not ask or connect the dots that the firearm restricted area is in the wrong GMU.

Could it have been an honest mistake?  :dunno:  I don't know.  Maybe.  Could the phone call to WDFW have been purposely stated to be misleading into getting permission?  I don't know........maybe.

The case is definitely interesting though.........and no jealousy at all here.   :hello:

More than likely you second scenario is right  :twocents: Allegedly  :twocents:...

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on May 20, 2016, 12:15:36 PM
Hypothetically.........that is funny. :chuckle:

 :)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on May 20, 2016, 12:20:31 PM
I believe that he could have thought the helicopter was legal.  I do remember the ad in the regulations for hiring a helicopter.  I'd even given it some thought (not serious thought, but a little thought) about using a helicopter to access some land for elk hunting. :twocents:

There are also ads for four wheelers in the Game Regs, does that introduce any confusion regarding the legality of operating them on Green Dot roads?

No.  But I think the green dot road rules were/are very clear.  I didn't get the impression that the flying rules were that clear (or easy to find).  :dunno:  I just think it is possible to give the guy the benefit of the doubt in the helicopter deal.

The bullwinkle case, I still can't understand why he would even want to shoot a tame elk (and in a closed unit).  Why even ask for permission to shoot him when it was obviously illegal?   :dunno:

 If I'm the judge, or on the jury, I believe the previous case clearly establishes a pattern of Tod Reichert not only completely understanding the rules laid out in the regs, he recognized the potential conflicts/grey areas, and laboriously looked for ways to subvert them.

 Take the helicopter conviction first, he knew full well that he himself could not fly and hunt so he sent someone else up, clearly in a conscious effort to get around the law.

 This case looks to have much the same effort put into finding some way, any way to be able to kill this bull and get away with it, right down to setting up a excuse to fall back on. I believe Popeshawnpaul and his colleagues may refer to this as premeditation! :twocents:

 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: coachcw on May 20, 2016, 12:42:34 PM
My assumption is the fellas who possibly took the brown bags and helped out knew the rules since they live there  and are hunters . hypothetically speaking of course .
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on May 20, 2016, 12:52:15 PM
So, he plead guilty and was convicted of lying? And not poaching or wildlife related offense for the 2007 offense?

Yes.

Not that I have experience as a judge but I see this not affecting the current case as much. He plead out for 2007 for lying. Sure there were other incidents involved but that's not what he was convicted of. There's no legal pattern of behavior for wildlife convictions so it presents itself as this being the first offense and he'll probably drag this out and fill this year's tags then plead out and get a slap on the wrist.

Just saying, not agreeing
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 20, 2016, 12:52:30 PM
It looks like NBC et all are not too much worried about being sued for defamation by libel. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Woodchuck on May 20, 2016, 12:57:22 PM
So, he plead guilty and was convicted of lying? And not poaching or wildlife related offense for the 2007 offense?

Yes.

Not that I have experience as a judge but I see this not affecting the current case as much. He plead out for 2007 for lying. Sure there were other incidents involved but that's not what he was convicted of. There's no legal pattern of behavior for wildlife convictions so it presents itself as this being the first offense and he'll probably drag this out and fill this year's tags then plead out and get a slap on the wrist.

Just saying, not agreeing
Just where do you get off making logical statements like that? Allegedly... There is no room for that sort of thing around here. Allegedly...
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 20, 2016, 01:26:01 PM
Teen mistakenly kills Idaho grizzly; famed elk shot in Washington

http://www.idahostatesman.com/outdoors/playing-outdoors/article78719782.html
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on May 20, 2016, 02:49:15 PM
I think my cd player is scratched because same things keep playing over and over.  :chuckle:  wait, since it's being called a "pet" does that mean he shot a nuisance pet that trespassed on someone else's property? I mean, the argument is sound, all the news articles and even on here its been clearly argued that this was a "pet" for a decade?  :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on May 20, 2016, 03:29:14 PM
I think my cd player is scratched because same things keep playing over and over.  wait, since it's being called a "pet" does that mean he shot a nuisance pet that trespassed on someone else's property? I mean, the argument is sound, all the news articles and even on here its been clearly argued that this was a "pet" for a decade?

 Let's not spin things Plat, nobody has argued, in any of the threads, that trespassing was involved. It has been made clear that he paid a trespass fee to the landowner, and I believe you know that.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Skillet on May 20, 2016, 03:37:01 PM
I think Plat meant the pet trespassed onto someone else's property and got shot because of it.

I'm not liking the whole "this guy shot a famous elk in a field and that's what we're mad about" vibe in these articles.  The fact remains you can shoot the friendliest, cutest, nicest most photogenic elk around, provided it is in an open unit. 

Let's not confuse the attempt by the media to get clicks by pulling on the heartstrings of bunny huggers with the real issue here - that the accused is charged with killing a branch bull closed to all branched bull hunting.

 :twocents:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on May 20, 2016, 03:40:46 PM
I think Plat meant the pet trespassed onto someone else's property and got shot because of it.

I'm not liking the whole "this guy shot a famous elk in a field and that's what we're mad about" vibe in these articles.  The fact remains you can shoot the friendliest, cutest, nicest most photogenic elk around, provided it is in an open unit. 

Let's not confuse the attempt by the media to get clicks by pulling on the heartstrings of bunny huggers with the real issue here - that the accused is charged with killing a branch bull closed to all branched bull hunting.

 :twocents:

 Got it, at first it sounded like he was interjecting trespass into it, I see where he is going now.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Branden on May 20, 2016, 03:46:00 PM
I'm not going to comment on the legalities of it because I was not there nor the one that got supposed permission to hunt that area.

I do have a problem though with the part about how it's bad to shoot an animal in a field. Zero difference then shooting a cat out of a tree. Neither one takes any skill yet 99% of the people on this site would jump at the chance to shoot a lion in a tree. The first thread on this issue was started because guys were saying it wasn't much of a hunt. Not that it was illegal. Then that started after a page or two.

So for the guys that are saying it's not hunting get off your high horse.
You do a lot of hound hunting Brandon??

oooo you beat me to it!

he likely has never cougar hunted....

I've been lucky enough to do many different hunts, including hunts in several other countries, cougar hunting is still my favorite hunt. Some of the best cougar hunts have ended by taking photos and leaving the cat in the tree! The most rewarding part is watching the young hounds learn and develop into experienced lion hounds. Almost anyone can become successful in many types of hunting, but to be a top notch hound hunter requires incredible dedication by the hunter and a very sharp learning curve. After all the time and work to get good at hound hunting, you can take your dogs to field, search for days and sometimes weeks to find a good track, you and your dogs can experience the thrill of the hunt, hopefully you catch the cat and get photos of the hunted, and then you leave the hunted animal unharmed in the wild after experiencing the hunt of lifetime. Hunting really can't get any better than that!

For those that choose to notch a cougar tag you then have some of the best meat in the woods!

I've actually shot 4 lions in Washington. All without hounds. So yes I've hunted cats before.

Let's say I was rich like some hunters are and a cat is on my bucket list. I hire the best outfitter I can find. Wait by the phone for a call once they get good snow in the area I'm hunting.

Fly in, ride out with an outfitter and cut tracks right away. Get lucky and the cat is treed after a few minutes cause it had a kill next to the road. Hike the 200 yards off the road and shoot it out of the tree. Get my trophy pictures of me with my cat.

Yes not all cat hunts are like that. But some are that easy. And some are way more physical. But at the end of the day most of the cats that get killed take absolutely zero skill from the guys doing the shooting. They pay money to a guy that trains dogs to tree animals. They follow the dogs and shoot an animal out of a tree. Absolutely zero skill on the shooters part. So you have a very good dog trainer, and a guy that pays money to shoot an animal out of a tree, and the actually hunters are the dogs.

How about a guided whitetail hunt with bait? You pay the money, ride out to the blind on the ATV. Wait for the feeder to kick on. Once it does here come the deer and bam you just killed a trophy whitetail. Again zero skill involved. Zero effort involved.

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bobcat on May 20, 2016, 05:53:50 PM
I think it's somewhat legitimate to call this elk a pet and to have a problem with the taking of this elk because of how tame it was. The reason it was this way is because it never lived in a GMU that was open to branch antler elk hunting. This was the only reason this bull survived to the age that he did. Nobody else killed him because it had always been illegal to do so. Until Tod Reichert came along.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: teanawayslayer on May 20, 2016, 06:07:36 PM
I think it's somewhat legitimate to call this elk a pet and to have a problem with the taking of this elk because of how tame it was. The reason it was this way is because it never lived in a GMU that was open to branch antler elk hunting. This was the only reason this bull survived to the age that he did. Nobody else killed him because it had always been illegal to do so. Until Tod Reichert came along.
one of the bulls that hung out with bullwinkle was tranquilized this winter and was relocate to Joe watt feed lot. When the bull came to it walked out of the trailer looked at all the elk ran all the way to east side before breaking through the fence. He found his way home within less than a week. Hmmm tame?  :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on May 20, 2016, 07:12:20 PM
That's the problem nowadays. People turning wild animals into pets. Did it not say they were feeding it and petting it? That sounds like a pet to me. Heck, my argument would be as the homeowner I contacted the State to get its "pet" off my property because it's ruining and damaging my property and interfering with my livestock if not, I'll take care of it myself.

Or, it threatened and intimidated my wife and/or kids when we went outside so I put it down.  If somebodies pet harasses or comes onto my grandmother's pasture and begins to harass her cattle it get a dirt nap and bath in the canal.

Is there a reason they were trying to remove elk? Was there more than one elk involved in relocation? Were there any plans to lethally remove them?

 8)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on May 20, 2016, 07:14:02 PM
Why can't the bunny huggers name and tame wolves..... :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on May 20, 2016, 07:16:24 PM
Isn't there a law against keeping wild animals as pets?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on May 20, 2016, 07:21:58 PM
I wonder how popular the land owner that gave Tod R permission is with the locals that enjoyed watching Bullwinkle? 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: dreamunelk on May 20, 2016, 07:42:51 PM
I wonder how popular the land owner that gave Tod R permission is with the locals that enjoyed watching Bullwinkle?

I wonder how much Mr. R. paid the landowner.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: ridgefire on May 20, 2016, 08:21:13 PM
I wonder how some people consider this hunting and try to justify it. Hopefully he cant buy his way out of this one.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 20, 2016, 10:00:21 PM
That's the problem nowadays. People turning wild animals into pets. Did it not say they were feeding it and petting it? That sounds like a pet to me. Heck, my argument would be as the homeowner I contacted the State to get its "pet" off my property because it's ruining and damaging my property and interfering with my livestock if not, I'll take care of it myself.

Or, it threatened and intimidated my wife and/or kids when we went outside so I put it down.  If somebodies pet harasses or comes onto my grandmother's pasture and begins to harass her cattle it get a dirt nap and bath in the canal.

Is there a reason they were trying to remove elk? Was there more than one elk involved in relocation? Were there any plans to lethally remove them?

 8)

The story would have NEVER gained traction if that were the case. 

Whatever gave anyone the notion that this was going to end well totally escapes me. 

OK, I have held my cards close to the vest, but this particular bull was just hanging out.  Not causing anybody any heartburn.  He was "just there." 

He hung with about five other mature bulls, but other than they were uber visible, he wasn't any different than any other bull that would go away once hunting season started IF he were in a legal GMU.  So, he is what my rancher cousin says are the "bums" he supports while making a living growing alfalfa to feed next winter. 

But "Bullwinkle,"  and his brothers, "were not causing enough of a problem" to be liquidated.  In fact, they provided enough entertainment that those who paid the 'bull elk band tax" willingly did so.  If one person objected and wanted lethal steps taken, what matters is that there was no controlling legal authority to implement lethal removal.     
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on May 20, 2016, 10:37:04 PM
Jd, I think you've done a good job presenting the issues. I just added some additional ideas as I was getting tired of hearing the same argument over and over and over and over and over and over. :chuckle: the same argument that spanned 3 different threads and what, 70 pages total?

Thought I'd present fresh new ideas to stir the pot and rattle the masses :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on May 20, 2016, 11:17:12 PM
Wow alot more keeps piling on since I looked at this site. Like I said I got on here to clear things up. I guess that didn't happen at all. The hunter seems to be judged worse and many of you discredited me. Do what you need to do.

The true fact is at the time the only question in anobodys  mind  was could a rifle be used, or did it need to be a muzzleloader. So they did what we were tought 30 years ago in the fire arms safety course and called and asked the question. Mr. Grant said that it could not be killed with a rifle in that unit. Then was asked if it could because the hunter was disabled.  He said he would figure it out. 16 minutes later (documented) he called back and told them they shouldn't use a rifle and muzzleloader was fine. That shows Grant knew the exact unit this was in.

I have been hunting for more than 3 decades. I miss the times when things didn't seem to change so much. I appaud the people on here that seem to know every rule all the time as thinges change. We all try to keep up on everything.  But are not afraid to call and ask for clarification when needed. In this case WDFG didn't just say it was ok, they went and double checked and again gave the ok.
This was a high profile tag, nobody involved wanted any issues in this case.

Worst part on this forum is the hunter has had some very bad things said about him. He is one of the most generous good people alive. And has done more for the elk than 95% of the hunters in this state combined. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on May 20, 2016, 11:20:37 PM
He is one of the most generous good people alive. And has done more for the elk than 95% of the hunters in this state combined.

 What more has he done than the bidder $1000 behind his bid wouldn't have done?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Colville on May 20, 2016, 11:30:51 PM
I can afford paid hunts. I'd never in a million years pay for a tag, then pay to access a block of alfalfa to shoot a popular and habituated animal. Its pathetic.  Even if compmetely legal, its beneath any sportsman who "does more" for elk than most.

What a crying blanking shame, regardless of the law. Id sooner never hunt again as share a camp with someone who felt that was honorable and is willing to hang their name on it. Or anyone else who would look away to keep in his good graces.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on May 20, 2016, 11:52:29 PM
 How about backing up your statement and answering the question kiti, my guess is you have nothing to back it up. ;)

 Better be careful of making false statements of Tod Riechert, you may get sued. :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on May 20, 2016, 11:56:43 PM
I think it's somewhat legitimate to call this elk a pet and to have a problem with the taking of this elk because of how tame it was. The reason it was this way is because it never lived in a GMU that was open to branch antler elk hunting. This was the only reason this bull survived to the age that he did. Nobody else killed him because it had always been illegal to do so. Until Tod Reichert came along.
one of the bulls that hung out with bullwinkle was tranquilized this winter and was relocate to Joe watt feed lot. When the bull came to it walked out of the trailer looked at all the elk ran all the way to east side before breaking through the fence. He found his way home within less than a week. Hmmm tame?  :chuckle:

Actually that's not the true story.  That poor bull had a tough ending. He ended up getting drug by his horns in yet another mistake by our game department and died. He had a less dignified death than the one you guys killed in the yard last season. Both cases were pretty sad.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on May 21, 2016, 12:00:13 AM
He is one of the most generous good people alive. And has done more for the elk than 95% of the hunters in this state combined.

 What more has he done than the bidder $1000 behind his bid wouldn't have done?

Well if you paid any attention,  I believe it was last year he bid up his own bI'd by another 5k when it was clear there was not another bid coming in.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on May 21, 2016, 12:02:27 AM
Wdfw could've saved time, money and resources and just called me and I would've came out and dropped those bulls for free. :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on May 21, 2016, 12:04:03 AM
He is one of the most generous good people alive. And has done more for the elk than 95% of the hunters in this state combined.

 What more has he done than the bidder $1000 behind his bid wouldn't have done?

Well if you paid any attention,  I believe it was last year he bid up his own bI'd by another 5k when it was clear there was not another bid coming in.

 Wow, I stand corrected, his $5k is indeed more for elk than 95% of the rest of the hunters in this state have done combined. :chuckle:  :mor:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on May 21, 2016, 12:12:15 AM
Wdfw could've saved time, money and resources and just called me and I would've came out and dropped those bulls for free. :chuckle:

Not funny. Sure you have gotten more than your fair share.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: winshooter88 on May 21, 2016, 12:21:49 AM
kiticaashunter,

What you said the question was only means that the game enforcement officer said that in a firearms restricted unit even a disabled hunter could not use a rifle and would have to use a muzzleloader, since we don't know which unit he was told it was in, that does nothing to prove that he knew what unit the elk was located in. Also I was always told that ignorance of the law was no excuse.

Partial quote from kitticaashunter's previous post.
"The true fact is at the time the only question in anobodys  mind  was could a rifle be used, or did it need to be a muzzleloader. So they did what we were tought 30 years ago in the fire arms safety course and called and asked the question. Mr. Grant said that it could not be killed with a rifle in that unit. Then was asked if it could because the hunter was disabled.  He said he would figure it out. 16 minutes later (documented) he called back and told them they shouldn't use a rifle and muzzleloader was fine. That shows Grant knew the exact unit this was in."

[/quote]
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jmscon on May 21, 2016, 12:32:32 AM
Depending on the date when this "hunt" occurred, there is a antlerless hunt in that unit mid November until mid December. You could the WDFW office and say: I'm elk hunting and I'm not sure if I can hunt with a mod rifle or not, can you help me out? Response: Where are you? I'll check and call you back. Ring: You can hunt there but it's a firearms restricted area, so shotgun, muzzle loader or bow. Response: Thanks!

Thing is the other elk that was shot in a "yard" was legal. This elk was not, ever! Oh yea, it was shot in a yard too!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on May 21, 2016, 12:33:40 AM
He is one of the most generous good people alive. And has done more for the elk than 95% of the hunters in this state combined.

 What more has he done than the bidder $1000 behind his bid wouldn't have done?

Well if you paid any attention,  I believe it was last year he bid up his own bI'd by another 5k when it was clear there was not another bid coming in.

 Wow, I stand corrected, his $5k is indeed more for elk than 95% of the rest of the hunters in this state have done combined. :chuckle:  :mor:

Guess the moron sign was pointed to me. That's fine All I was trying to do here is tell the honest side of the story of a good man that has put hundreds of thousands of dollars into it in the last few years.

The situation last season was unfortunate.  The honest truth is nobody involved in the situation tried to get around anything or cheat any rules. They checked,  and Grant double checked to make sure it was all on the up and up.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on May 21, 2016, 12:48:21 AM
kiticaashunter,

What you said the question was only means that the game enforcement officer said that in a firearms restricted unit even a disabled hunter could not use a rifle and would have to use a muzzleloader, since we don't know which unit he was told it was in, that does nothing to prove that he knew what unit the elk was located in. Also I was always told that ignorance of the law was no excuse.

Partial quote from kitticaashunter's previous post.
"The true fact is at the time the only question in anobodys  mind  was could a rifle be used, or did it need to be a muzzleloader. So they did what we were tought 30 years ago in the fire arms safety course and called and asked the question. Mr. Grant said that it could not be killed with a rifle in that unit. Then was asked if it could because the hunter was disabled.  He said he would figure it out. 16 minutes later (documented) he called back and told them they shouldn't use a rifle and muzzleloader was fine. That shows Grant knew the exact unit this was in."

[/quote]

Sorry if I wasn't clear on that. Unit next door would have been fine with any weapon. Mr. Grant knew exactly what unit and in fact what peice of property that bull was on when he told them they couldn't use the rifle and needed to use a muzzleloader.

I know you didn't say this but there has been a lot of mention of why the bull was moved to be field dressed. It wasn't some big cover up. The land owner requested a gut pile was not left there. Personally I would think that would be a big part of the story. Last I heard nobody even the people with the newspaper articles ever asked the land owner if that was the case. Instead they print on the words of people that live on the other side of the state, and a couple anti hunters.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on May 21, 2016, 12:58:57 AM
Depending on the date when this "hunt" occurred, there is a antlerless hunt in that unit mid November until mid December. You could the WDFW office and say: I'm elk hunting and I'm not sure if I can hunt with a mod rifle or not, can you help me out? Response: Where are you? I'll check and call you back. Ring: You can hunt there but it's a firearms restricted area, so shotgun, muzzle loader or bow. Response: Thanks!

Thing is the other elk that was shot in a "yard" was legal. This elk was not, ever! Oh yea, it was shot in a yard too!

Mr. Grant knew the exact bull that was was going to be taken. There was no trickery or word's twisted  in this case. At the time he gave gave the good to go he was up for promotion. Since then he has gotten it and tried hard to distance himself from this. He is an honest guy and will tell the truth on the stand. And that will be that he double checked to make sure it was all good.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: ridgefire on May 21, 2016, 03:16:02 AM
How and why can you try to justify the taking of this elk when it was obviously taken in a closed unit Mr kiticaashunter? Just curious, but since you seem to know all the facts about the hunt what unit was the bull shot in and was it open to any bull with that tag?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bearpaw on May 21, 2016, 06:00:51 AM
Depending on the date when this "hunt" occurred, there is a antlerless hunt in that unit mid November until mid December. You could the WDFW office and say: I'm elk hunting and I'm not sure if I can hunt with a mod rifle or not, can you help me out? Response: Where are you? I'll check and call you back. Ring: You can hunt there but it's a firearms restricted area, so shotgun, muzzle loader or bow. Response: Thanks!

Thing is the other elk that was shot in a "yard" was legal. This elk was not, ever! Oh yea, it was shot in a yard too!

Mr. Grant knew the exact bull that was was going to be taken. There was no trickery or word's twisted  in this case. At the time he gave gave the good to go he was up for promotion. Since then he has gotten it and tried hard to distance himself from this. He is an honest guy and will tell the truth on the stand. And that will be that he double checked to make sure it was all good.

Thank you for your many responses, it good to hear the other side of the story. I understand that many hunters would not want to hunt this animal because they view it as not being a challenging hunt and many view it as unethical to shoot an animal that thinks it's safe in an alfalfa field where it never gets shot at. In reality this animal had probably been legal game in this unit at a previous time in it's life. No doubt since maturing into an outstanding animal there have been dozens if not hundreds of hunters who tried to figure out how they could hunt this animal. In the meantime the animal became more complacent as it was not hunted and was even fed by local residents. It appears many local people adopted the bull as their mascot so to speak.

While many hunters condemn Reichert for shooting this animal it sounds like Reichert did the right thing and asked WDFW how to legally hunt the animal. I have pointed out that if a person calls WDFW with a question and is told you can hunt that seems to me all that is needed. I don't see how Reichert can be found guilty if he was told by WDFW after they researched the issue, that he can shoot the animal with his muzzleloader instead of his rifle and that is what he did.

I feel a person is innocent until proven guilty, I find it unfortunate that hunters are so quick to throw other hunters under the bus before they know the facts. I find it unfortunate that hunters turn on each other because they think one way of hunting is more ethical than another. I also find it unfortunate that a hunter needs a crystal ball to know if what they were told they could do by the enforcing agency will result in such a public outcry.

I'm sure someone will try to chastise me because I didn't publicly join in this witch hunt and I'll probably be accused of being an unethical hunter because I don't join in the outcry because this "mascot" was shot in a farmer's field. But I view it in a neutral "black and white" manner, did the hunter break the law or didn't he break the law. After finally hearing the other side of the story I'm not convinced Reichert broke the law. It sounds like he wanted to find a way to legally take the animal and was told by WDFW how to take the animal and then he proceeded. Sorry, but I question if there was any intent to break the law after hearing the other side of the story.

This whole thing more or less reminds me of "Cecil the Lion", the media will blow this story out of proportion to make hunters look bad because the animal was given a human name and considered by locals to be a pet! Unfortunately hunters are helping this scenario to happen! Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying the locals are at fault or that it was smart to shoot this animal. But if you take the emotion out of this story and simply ask yourself two questions, "Was the hunter told by the regulating agency he can shoot the animal?" and "Did the hunter intend to break the law?" While I understand ignorance of the law is no defense I think it's very questionable if Reichert can be found guilty. I would like to hear what Popeshawnpaul thinks after reading all of this?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 21, 2016, 06:14:20 AM
If the only valid elk tag you were holding clearly sets these parameters:

Elk: Any 300 or 500 series GMU open to elk hunting except GMUs not open to branch antlered bull elk hunting

What were you doing hunting elk in GMU 334 in the first place?  Is there anything anywhere in the Game Regs that even suggest that GMU 334 is open to branch antlered elk hunting.


     
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: NOCK NOCK on May 21, 2016, 06:19:59 AM
These most recent posts,(esp. by kiticaashunter) remind me of the Bill Clinton/Monica deal.  :yike:

Bills statement, "I did not have sexual relations with that women",
 
Technically he was truthful & correct...He absolutely did not............She had sexual relations with him.

I view kiti's postings here as a poor attempt of muddying the waters.  :twocents:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bearpaw on May 21, 2016, 06:20:39 AM
I'm not going to comment on the legalities of it because I was not there nor the one that got supposed permission to hunt that area.

I do have a problem though with the part about how it's bad to shoot an animal in a field. Zero difference then shooting a cat out of a tree. Neither one takes any skill yet 99% of the people on this site would jump at the chance to shoot a lion in a tree. The first thread on this issue was started because guys were saying it wasn't much of a hunt. Not that it was illegal. Then that started after a page or two.

So for the guys that are saying it's not hunting get off your high horse.
You do a lot of hound hunting Brandon??

oooo you beat me to it!

he likely has never cougar hunted....

I've been lucky enough to do many different hunts, including hunts in several other countries, cougar hunting is still my favorite hunt. Some of the best cougar hunts have ended by taking photos and leaving the cat in the tree! The most rewarding part is watching the young hounds learn and develop into experienced lion hounds. Almost anyone can become successful in many types of hunting, but to be a top notch hound hunter requires incredible dedication by the hunter and a very sharp learning curve. After all the time and work to get good at hound hunting, you can take your dogs to field, search for days and sometimes weeks to find a good track, you and your dogs can experience the thrill of the hunt, hopefully you catch the cat and get photos of the hunted, and then you leave the hunted animal unharmed in the wild after experiencing the hunt of lifetime. Hunting really can't get any better than that!

For those that choose to notch a cougar tag you then have some of the best meat in the woods!

I've actually shot 4 lions in Washington. All without hounds. So yes I've hunted cats before.

Let's say I was rich like some hunters are and a cat is on my bucket list. I hire the best outfitter I can find. Wait by the phone for a call once they get good snow in the area I'm hunting.

Fly in, ride out with an outfitter and cut tracks right away. Get lucky and the cat is treed after a few minutes cause it had a kill next to the road. Hike the 200 yards off the road and shoot it out of the tree. Get my trophy pictures of me with my cat.

Yes not all cat hunts are like that. But some are that easy. And some are way more physical. But at the end of the day most of the cats that get killed take absolutely zero skill from the guys doing the shooting. They pay money to a guy that trains dogs to tree animals. They follow the dogs and shoot an animal out of a tree. Absolutely zero skill on the shooters part. So you have a very good dog trainer, and a guy that pays money to shoot an animal out of a tree, and the actually hunters are the dogs.

How about a guided whitetail hunt with bait? You pay the money, ride out to the blind on the ATV. Wait for the feeder to kick on. Once it does here come the deer and bam you just killed a trophy whitetail. Again zero skill involved. Zero effort involved.

I was more or less correct, you have never cougar hunted with hounds. Instead you have conjured up "how you think it's unethical" in your mind.

Hooray, you are a stud hunter, you killed 4 lions without hounds, that must make everyone who wants to hunt with hounds unethical! I bet you even donated to HSUS so they could ban bear baiting and hound hunting. :chuckle:

FYI, you are nobody special, I know lots of hunters who have killed cougar without dogs, hundreds are killed every year in WA without dogs, all you have to do is follow the tracks until you see the cat and shoot it, anyone can do that, it's the easy way out, you didn't go to all the effort training hounds and doing it right. You simply walked out in the woods and shot those cats, pathetic to say the least. maybe you were even just road hunting and blasted one using your truck hood for a rest. Maybe you shot one through your bedroom window out of your back yard. Worse yet, you may have baited one in or you may have really stooped low and shot one of those cats when it came in to finish eating the deer it worked so hard to kill so it could merely survive! How disgusting! :chuckle:

It's obvious to me you are the moral compass of hunters, you know how it should be done, we should all be like you or we should not hunt, we are all pathetic.
-
-
-
-
-
Well I'm very sorry for having to turn the table on you with those disgusting remarks.  :sry:

I just wanted to show you how prejudice and narrow minded you are being. As hunters we should all support each other in all legal pursuits of hunting. It's specifically these narrow minded tactics that continue to cause the erosion of hunting. Please see the phrase in the bottom of this post!

"Americans are systematically advocating, legislating, and voting away each others rights. Support all user groups & quit losing opportunity!"
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: teanawayslayer on May 21, 2016, 06:26:46 AM
Depending on the date when this "hunt" occurred, there is a antlerless hunt in that unit mid November until mid December. You could the WDFW office and say: I'm elk hunting and I'm not sure if I can hunt with a mod rifle or not, can you help me out? Response: Where are you? I'll check and call you back. Ring: You can hunt there but it's a firearms restricted area, so shotgun, muzzle loader or bow. Response: Thanks!

Thing is the other elk that was shot in a "yard" was legal. This elk was not, ever! Oh yea, it was shot in a yard too!

Mr. Grant knew the exact bull that was was going to be taken. There was no trickery or word's twisted  in this case. At the time he gave gave the good to go he was up for promotion. Since then he has gotten it and tried hard to distance himself from this. He is an honest guy and will tell the truth on the stand. And that will be that he double checked to make sure it was all good.
im glad you cleared this issue up for us.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on May 21, 2016, 06:39:08 AM
I still have a question even though most has been cleared up by now.  Didn't wdfw investigate the case and then hand it over to the county, and recommend prosecution? I would have thought that if Mr Grant gave permission, then the case would have been dropped?  Is it simply because Grant had no authority legally to give the OK?

If permission was really given like they say, then I don't see why he would be found guilty....but then I also don't see why he would even be charged if permission were given?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Branden on May 21, 2016, 06:45:19 AM
I'm not going to comment on the legalities of it because I was not there nor the one that got supposed permission to hunt that area.

I do have a problem though with the part about how it's bad to shoot an animal in a field. Zero difference then shooting a cat out of a tree. Neither one takes any skill yet 99% of the people on this site would jump at the chance to shoot a lion in a tree. The first thread on this issue was started because guys were saying it wasn't much of a hunt. Not that it was illegal. Then that started after a page or two.

So for the guys that are saying it's not hunting get off your high horse.
You do a lot of hound hunting Brandon??

oooo you beat me to it!

he likely has never cougar hunted....

I've been lucky enough to do many different hunts, including hunts in several other countries, cougar hunting is still my favorite hunt. Some of the best cougar hunts have ended by taking photos and leaving the cat in the tree! The most rewarding part is watching the young hounds learn and develop into experienced lion hounds. Almost anyone can become successful in many types of hunting, but to be a top notch hound hunter requires incredible dedication by the hunter and a very sharp learning curve. After all the time and work to get good at hound hunting, you can take your dogs to field, search for days and sometimes weeks to find a good track, you and your dogs can experience the thrill of the hunt, hopefully you catch the cat and get photos of the hunted, and then you leave the hunted animal unharmed in the wild after experiencing the hunt of lifetime. Hunting really can't get any better than that!

For those that choose to notch a cougar tag you then have some of the best meat in the woods!

I've actually shot 4 lions in Washington. All without hounds. So yes I've hunted cats before.

Let's say I was rich like some hunters are and a cat is on my bucket list. I hire the best outfitter I can find. Wait by the phone for a call once they get good snow in the area I'm hunting.

Fly in, ride out with an outfitter and cut tracks right away. Get lucky and the cat is treed after a few minutes cause it had a kill next to the road. Hike the 200 yards off the road and shoot it out of the tree. Get my trophy pictures of me with my cat.

Yes not all cat hunts are like that. But some are that easy. And some are way more physical. But at the end of the day most of the cats that get killed take absolutely zero skill from the guys doing the shooting. They pay money to a guy that trains dogs to tree animals. They follow the dogs and shoot an animal out of a tree. Absolutely zero skill on the shooters part. So you have a very good dog trainer, and a guy that pays money to shoot an animal out of a tree, and the actually hunters are the dogs.

How about a guided whitetail hunt with bait? You pay the money, ride out to the blind on the ATV. Wait for the feeder to kick on. Once it does here come the deer and bam you just killed a trophy whitetail. Again zero skill involved. Zero effort involved.

I was more or less correct, you have never cougar hunted with hounds. Instead you have conjured up "how you think it's unethical" in your mind.

Hooray, you are a stud hunter, you killed 4 lions without hounds, that must make everyone who wants to hunt with hounds unethical! I bet you even donated to HSUS so they could ban bear baiting and hound hunting. :chuckle:

FYI, you are nobody special, I know lots of hunters who have killed cougar without dogs, hundreds are killed every year in WA without dogs, all you have to do is follow the tracks until you see the cat and shoot it, anyone can do that, it's the easy way out, you didn't go to all the effort training hounds and doing it right. You simply walked out in the woods and shot those cats, pathetic to say the least. maybe you were even just road hunting and blasted one using your truck hood for a rest. Maybe you shot one through your bedroom window out of your back yard. Worse yet, you may have baited one in or you may have really stooped low and shot one of those cats when it came in to finish eating the deer it worked so hard to kill so it could merely survive! How disgusting! :chuckle:

It's obvious to me you are the moral compass of hunters, you know how it should be done, we should all be like you or we should not hunt, we are all pathetic.
-
-
-
-
-
Well I'm very sorry for having to turn the table on you with those disgusting remarks.  :sry:

I just wanted to show you how prejudice and narrow minded you are being. As hunters we should all support each other in all legal pursuits of hunting. It's specifically these narrow minded tactics that continue to cause the erosion of hunting. Please see the phrase in the bottom of this post!

"Americans are systematically advocating, legislating, and voting away each others rights. Support all user groups & quit losing opportunity!"

I believe you have my position wrong and I don't even care that you tried to insult me. I only tried to point out to the guys saying this elk that was killed wasn't hunted was actually hunted even though it didn't take a lot of effort or skill just like some other hunts. 

There are a ton of what I consider "easy hunts" yet I still call it hunting because unlike what you got from my post I don't care how other people hunt or think my way is above others ways of hunting.

And as for hunting with dogs my opinion will not change. A good guide could easily get my wife who has never hunted before a nice cat with hounds. It doesn't take a skilled hunter to shoot an animal out of a tree. It takes a good dog trainer to train the dogs, and a couple of good dogs.

That doesn't mean I think it should not be allowed. It's the best way to manage cats so it should be legal.

Regards, Branden
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 21, 2016, 07:00:16 AM
I have known that reporters have  a reporter has been takling to and asking questions of local Residents at least one local resident since early this year and I recognized by the nature of the questions that were being asked how the story was being developed. e.g. into another "Cecil" story. 

I keep asking:  What ever gave anyone the notion that this was going to end well? 

Irrespective of whether charges had been filed or not this story was already going to end up in the news.  There were more than a couple local residents who were absolutely outraged about the shooting of this particular elk in the location he was taken and btw these people are not what anyone would recognize as "bunny huggers."

The thing that really ticks me off is that this incident will be exploited in an attempt to shame all hunters even though the fact of the matter is that not one hunter outside of the individuals involved had any responsibility what so ever for deciding to target this animal. 

From the very beginning this was never going to end well.  Stevie Wonder could see that.  Had this bull moved up into Shnebley Canyon and been taken there, people would have cared, but they would not be outraged.

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bearpaw on May 21, 2016, 07:06:46 AM
I'm not going to comment on the legalities of it because I was not there nor the one that got supposed permission to hunt that area.

I do have a problem though with the part about how it's bad to shoot an animal in a field. Zero difference then shooting a cat out of a tree. Neither one takes any skill yet 99% of the people on this site would jump at the chance to shoot a lion in a tree. The first thread on this issue was started because guys were saying it wasn't much of a hunt. Not that it was illegal. Then that started after a page or two.

So for the guys that are saying it's not hunting get off your high horse.
You do a lot of hound hunting Brandon??

oooo you beat me to it!

he likely has never cougar hunted....

I've been lucky enough to do many different hunts, including hunts in several other countries, cougar hunting is still my favorite hunt. Some of the best cougar hunts have ended by taking photos and leaving the cat in the tree! The most rewarding part is watching the young hounds learn and develop into experienced lion hounds. Almost anyone can become successful in many types of hunting, but to be a top notch hound hunter requires incredible dedication by the hunter and a very sharp learning curve. After all the time and work to get good at hound hunting, you can take your dogs to field, search for days and sometimes weeks to find a good track, you and your dogs can experience the thrill of the hunt, hopefully you catch the cat and get photos of the hunted, and then you leave the hunted animal unharmed in the wild after experiencing the hunt of lifetime. Hunting really can't get any better than that!

For those that choose to notch a cougar tag you then have some of the best meat in the woods!

I've actually shot 4 lions in Washington. All without hounds. So yes I've hunted cats before.

Let's say I was rich like some hunters are and a cat is on my bucket list. I hire the best outfitter I can find. Wait by the phone for a call once they get good snow in the area I'm hunting.

Fly in, ride out with an outfitter and cut tracks right away. Get lucky and the cat is treed after a few minutes cause it had a kill next to the road. Hike the 200 yards off the road and shoot it out of the tree. Get my trophy pictures of me with my cat.

Yes not all cat hunts are like that. But some are that easy. And some are way more physical. But at the end of the day most of the cats that get killed take absolutely zero skill from the guys doing the shooting. They pay money to a guy that trains dogs to tree animals. They follow the dogs and shoot an animal out of a tree. Absolutely zero skill on the shooters part. So you have a very good dog trainer, and a guy that pays money to shoot an animal out of a tree, and the actually hunters are the dogs.

How about a guided whitetail hunt with bait? You pay the money, ride out to the blind on the ATV. Wait for the feeder to kick on. Once it does here come the deer and bam you just killed a trophy whitetail. Again zero skill involved. Zero effort involved.

I was more or less correct, you have never cougar hunted with hounds. Instead you have conjured up "how you think it's unethical" in your mind.

Hooray, you are a stud hunter, you killed 4 lions without hounds, that must make everyone who wants to hunt with hounds unethical! I bet you even donated to HSUS so they could ban bear baiting and hound hunting. :chuckle:

FYI, you are nobody special, I know lots of hunters who have killed cougar without dogs, hundreds are killed every year in WA without dogs, all you have to do is follow the tracks until you see the cat and shoot it, anyone can do that, it's the easy way out, you didn't go to all the effort training hounds and doing it right. You simply walked out in the woods and shot those cats, pathetic to say the least. maybe you were even just road hunting and blasted one using your truck hood for a rest. Maybe you shot one through your bedroom window out of your back yard. Worse yet, you may have baited one in or you may have really stooped low and shot one of those cats when it came in to finish eating the deer it worked so hard to kill so it could merely survive! How disgusting! :chuckle:

It's obvious to me you are the moral compass of hunters, you know how it should be done, we should all be like you or we should not hunt, we are all pathetic.
-
-
-
-
-
Well I'm very sorry for having to turn the table on you with those disgusting remarks.  :sry:

I just wanted to show you how prejudice and narrow minded you are being. As hunters we should all support each other in all legal pursuits of hunting. It's specifically these narrow minded tactics that continue to cause the erosion of hunting. Please see the phrase in the bottom of this post!

"Americans are systematically advocating, legislating, and voting away each others rights. Support all user groups & quit losing opportunity!"

I believe you have my position wrong and I don't even care that you tried to insult me. I only tried to point out to the guys saying this elk that was killed wasn't hunted was actually hunted even though it didn't take a lot of effort or skill just like some other hunts. 

There are a ton of what I consider "easy hunts" yet I still call it hunting because unlike what you got from my post I don't care how other people hunt or think my way is above others ways of hunting.

And as for hunting with dogs my opinion will not change. A good guide could easily get my wife who has never hunted before a nice cat with hounds. It doesn't take a skilled hunter to shoot an animal out of a tree. It takes a good dog trainer to train the dogs, and a couple of good dogs.

That doesn't mean I think it should not be allowed. It's the best way to manage cats so it should be legal.

Regards, Branden

It appeared to me that you were putting down hound hunters as being less skilled and anyone else who hunted or might want to hunt with hounds, so I tried to put it in perspective that maybe some people would view just going out and shooting one the easy way without all the effort as the unskilled method of hunting cougar. Those aren't my feelings but I put your comments in perspective, so don't feel insulted!

I think it's bad for the sport for hunters to act as if they are somehow better than other hunters or that their preferred methods are more skilled or ethical than other hunters or their hunting methods. That attitude is our own worst enemy! If I misunderstood your post I certainly apologize, but that was the way it appeared to me.  :dunno:

I agree with you that the elk was hunted, even if it was considered to be an unethical hunt by many other hunters and local residents. I am discouraged by the outrage many hunters exhibited before hearing both sides of the story, that's not how this country was founded, but increasingly how people seem to react!  :twocents:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Branden on May 21, 2016, 07:17:12 AM
Yea no biggie. I don't think I would get much enjoyment about telling the story of how I shot a 190" muley over my hood compared to the 150" buck I backpacked in 10 miles and killed with my bow. But both are hunting.

Some hunts take way more effort and skill then others. But the outrage for this bull started not because it was allegedly poached but because it was an easy hunt and not the way these guys would do it. Same as the article states with the "little girl saying it's not hunting".

Sorry to derail this from the judges and prosecutors we have here on Huntwa. You guys can continue labeling this illegal before this guy gets his chance at a trial.

I always thought it was innocent until proven guilty? The law must have changed and I've been to busy to notice. Thanks for helping educate me judges and prosecutors. :)

Regards, Branden
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: fishngamereaper on May 21, 2016, 07:20:29 AM
Depending on the date when this "hunt" occurred, there is a antlerless hunt in that unit mid November until mid December. You could the WDFW office and say: I'm elk hunting and I'm not sure if I can hunt with a mod rifle or not, can you help me out? Response: Where are you? I'll check and call you back. Ring: You can hunt there but it's a firearms restricted area, so shotgun, muzzle loader or bow. Response: Thanks!

Thing is the other elk that was shot in a "yard" was legal. This elk was not, ever! Oh yea, it was shot in a yard too!

Mr. Grant knew the exact bull that was was going to be taken. There was no trickery or word's twisted  in this case. At the time he gave gave the good to go he was up for promotion. Since then he has gotten it and tried hard to distance himself from this. He is an honest guy and will tell the truth on the stand. And that will be that he double checked to make sure it was all good.

I'm curious are you testifying in the case. Your  giving the impression that you know specific details related to the case, which is interesting because generally open forum web conversation about "facts" of a case are normally not recommended by either side. And I'm sure Grant would not appreciate the nature at which he is being thrown under the bus in regards to his alleged involvement.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Ghost Hunter on May 21, 2016, 07:20:56 AM
Is there going to be any open seats in the courtroom for a casual observer?  Might be fun to go 'live' for the final chapter? :o
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 21, 2016, 07:26:34 AM
Yea no biggie. I don't think I would get much enjoyment about telling the story of how I shot a 190" muley over my hood compared to the 150" buck I backpacked in 10 miles and killed with my bow. But both are hunting.

Some hunts take way more effort and skill then others. But the outrage for this bull started not because it was allegedly poached but because it was an easy hunt and not the way these guys would do it. Same as the article states with the "little girl saying it's not hunting".

Sorry to derail this from the judges and prosecutors we have here on Huntwa. You guys can continue labeling this illegal before this guy gets his chance at a trial.

I always thought it was innocent until proven guilty? The law must have changed and I've been to busy to notice. Thanks for helping educate me judges and prosecutors. :)

Regards, Branden

People who live right at ground zero were absolutely fuming mad about it.  They were not a little upset, they were steaming bloody madder than hell over it.   The individual I know said that if he had wandered "off the reservation" e.g. out of GMU 334 and got killed that they would have missed him, but would have said: well why'd ya' go wandering off to where you would get shot.  Ya big dummy. 

Again, I am not talking about bunny huggers here.  People knew he could wander up north and get plugged any day, but so long as he stayed home shooting him was inexcusable. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bearpaw on May 21, 2016, 07:31:22 AM
Yea no biggie. I don't think I would get much enjoyment about telling the story of how I shot a 190" muley over my hood compared to the 150" buck I backpacked in 10 miles and killed with my bow. But both are hunting.

Some hunts take way more effort and skill then others. But the outrage for this bull started not because it was allegedly poached but because it was an easy hunt and not the way these guys would do it. Same as the article states with the "little girl saying it's not hunting".

Sorry to derail this from the judges and prosecutors we have here on Huntwa. You guys can continue labeling this illegal before this guy gets his chance at a trial.

I always thought it was innocent until proven guilty? The law must have changed and I've been to busy to notice. Thanks for helping educate me judges and prosecutors. :)

Regards, Branden

I see this elk issue the same way!  :dunno:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: mfswallace on May 21, 2016, 07:41:21 AM
Depending on the date when this "hunt" occurred, there is a antlerless hunt in that unit mid November until mid December. You could the WDFW office and say: I'm elk hunting and I'm not sure if I can hunt with a mod rifle or not, can you help me out? Response: Where are you? I'll check and call you back. Ring: You can hunt there but it's a firearms restricted area, so shotgun, muzzle loader or bow. Response: Thanks!

Thing is the other elk that was shot in a "yard" was legal. This elk was not, ever! Oh yea, it was shot in a yard too!

Mr. Grant knew the exact bull that was was going to be taken. There was no trickery or word's twisted  in this case. At the time he gave gave the good to go he was up for promotion. Since then he has gotten it and tried hard to distance himself from this. He is an honest guy and will tell the truth on the stand. And that will be that he double checked to make sure it was all good.

Thank you for your many responses, it good to hear the other side of the story. I understand that many hunters would not want to hunt this animal because they view it as not being a challenging hunt and many view it as unethical to shoot an animal that thinks it's safe in an alfalfa field where it never gets shot at. In reality this animal had probably been legal game in this unit at a previous time in it's life. No doubt since maturing into an outstanding animal there have been dozens if not hundreds of hunters who tried to figure out how they could hunt this animal. In the meantime the animal became more complacent as it was not hunted and was even fed by local residents. It appears many local people adopted the bull as their mascot so to speak.

While many hunters condemn Reichert for shooting this animal it sounds like Reichert did the right thing and asked WDFW how to legally hunt the animal. I have pointed out that if a person calls WDFW with a question and is told you can hunt that seems to me all that is needed. I don't see how Reichert can be found guilty if he was told by WDFW after they researched the issue, that he can shoot the animal with his muzzleloader instead of his rifle and that is what he did.

I feel a person is innocent until proven guilty, I find it unfortunate that hunters are so quick to throw other hunters under the bus before they know the facts. I find it unfortunate that hunters turn on each other because they think one way of hunting is more ethical than another. I also find it unfortunate that a hunter needs a crystal ball to know if what they were told they could do by the enforcing agency will result in such a public outcry.

I'm sure someone will try to chastise me because I didn't publicly join in this witch hunt and I'll probably be accused of being an unethical hunter because I don't join in the outcry because this "mascot" was shot in a farmer's field. But I view it in a neutral "black and white" manner, did the hunter break the law or didn't he break the law. After finally hearing the other side of the story I'm not convinced Reichert broke the law. It sounds like he wanted to find a way to legally take the animal and was told by WDFW how to take the animal and then he proceeded. Sorry, but I question if there was any intent to break the law after hearing the other side of the story.

This whole thing more or less reminds me of "Cecil the Lion", the media will blow this story out of proportion to make hunters look bad because the animal was given a human name and considered by locals to be a pet! Unfortunately hunters are helping this scenario to happen! Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying the locals are at fault or that it was smart to shoot this animal. But if you take the emotion out of this story and simply ask yourself two questions, "Was the hunter told by the regulating agency he can shoot the animal?" and "Did the hunter intend to break the law?" While I understand ignorance of the law is no defense I think it's very questionable if Reichert can be found guilty. I would like to hear what Popeshawnpaul thinks after reading all of this?

Way to protect yourself from a lawsuit :tup: :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Ghost Hunter on May 21, 2016, 07:42:11 AM
 :yike: Sounds like somebody hit a nerve  :dunno:  Not sure how it relates to this thread :dunno:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 21, 2016, 07:42:38 AM
I still have a question even though most has been cleared up by now.  Didn't wdfw investigate the case and then hand it over to the county, and recommend prosecution? I would have thought that if Mr Grant gave permission, then the case would have been dropped?  Is it simply because Grant had no authority legally to give the OK?

If permission was really given like they say, then I don't see why he would be found guilty....but then I also don't see why he would even be charged if permission were given?

WDFW absolutely did not recommended prosecution.  The county did that on thier own knowing  if it did go to court WDFW is not going to be good for thier case. They county got a lot of pressure from the likes of the tax money theif and the front porch elk hunter. This case will be dropped long before it sees a jury.

Prosecutor's don't go fishing for cases.  Law enforcement agencies bring cases to them.  And you better watch the libel buster, I commute by train three hours/day.  I have time to compose my thoughts on my ipad and email them to myself.  Posting them takes two clicks of a mouse and what I do on my break time is my business. 

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on May 21, 2016, 08:01:27 AM
Yea no biggie. I don't think I would get much enjoyment about telling the story of how I shot a 190" muley over my hood compared to the 150" buck I backpacked in 10 miles and killed with my bow. But both are hunting.

Some hunts take way more effort and skill then others. But the outrage for this bull started not because it was allegedly poached but because it was an easy hunt and not the way these guys would do it. Same as the article states with the "little girl saying it's not hunting".

Sorry to derail this from the judges and prosecutors we have here on Huntwa. You guys can continue labeling this illegal before this guy gets his chance at a trial.

I always thought it was innocent until proven guilty? The law must have changed and I've been to busy to notice. Thanks for helping educate me judges and prosecutors. :)

Regards, Branden

People who live right at ground zero were absolutely fuming mad about it.  They were not a little upset, they were steaming bloody madder than hell over it.   The individual I know said that if he had wandered "off the reservation" e.g. out of GMU 334 and got killed that they would have missed him, but would have said: well why'd ya' go wandering off to where you would get shot.  Ya big dummy. 

Again, I am not talking about bunny huggers here.  People knew he could wander up north and get plugged any day, but so long as he stayed home shooting him was inexcusable.

 And one of them was a Kittitas county superior court judge.......The ones that came up with the name.....And Craig Schnebly  ("Schnebly Bull") is no newcomer to the area....  (Schnebly Rd....Schnebly Canyon).
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on May 21, 2016, 08:04:43 AM
Depending on the date when this "hunt" occurred, there is a antlerless hunt in that unit mid November until mid December. You could the WDFW office and say: I'm elk hunting and I'm not sure if I can hunt with a mod rifle or not, can you help me out? Response: Where are you? I'll check and call you back. Ring: You can hunt there but it's a firearms restricted area, so shotgun, muzzle loader or bow. Response: Thanks!

Thing is the other elk that was shot in a "yard" was legal. This elk was not, ever! Oh yea, it was shot in a yard too!

Mr. Grant knew the exact bull that was was going to be taken. There was no trickery or word's twisted  in this case. At the time he gave gave the good to go he was up for promotion. Since then he has gotten it and tried hard to distance himself from this. He is an honest guy and will tell the truth on the stand. And that will be that he double checked to make sure it was all good.

I'm curious are you testifying in the case. Your  giving the impression that you know specific details related to the case, which is interesting because generally open forum web conversation about "facts" of a case are normally not recommended by either side. And I'm sure Grant would not appreciate the nature at which he is being thrown under the bus in regards to his alleged involvement.

At this point I have not been asked to testify. I will have no problem doing so and telling them what I know if they do ask. But I really doubt this case ends up in court, the charge was a result of relentless pressure from a few.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: mfswallace on May 21, 2016, 08:06:49 AM
for all bearpaws and kiti excuses there is no legal authority  for this elk to have been shot where it was  :twocents: 

Now the court will decide
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: grundy53 on May 21, 2016, 08:15:37 AM
Wow alot more keeps piling on since I looked at this site. Like I said I got on here to clear things up. I guess that didn't happen at all. The hunter seems to be judged worse and many of you discredited me. Do what you need to do.

The true fact is at the time the only question in anobodys  mind  was could a rifle be used, or did it need to be a muzzleloader. So they did what we were tought 30 years ago in the fire arms safety course and called and asked the question. Mr. Grant said that it could not be killed with a rifle in that unit. Then was asked if it could because the hunter was disabled.  He said he would figure it out. 16 minutes later (documented) he called back and told them they shouldn't use a rifle and muzzleloader was fine. That shows Grant knew the exact unit this was in.

I have been hunting for more than 3 decades. I miss the times when things didn't seem to change so much. I appaud the people on here that seem to know every rule all the time as thinges change. We all try to keep up on everything.  But are not afraid to call and ask for clarification when needed. In this case WDFG didn't just say it was ok, they went and double checked and again gave the ok.
This was a high profile tag, nobody involved wanted any issues in this case.

Worst part on this forum is the hunter has had some very bad things said about him. He is one of the most generous good people alive. And has done more for the elk than 95% of the hunters in this state combined.
If this is true then Mr Grant should be reprimanded.

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on May 21, 2016, 08:20:35 AM
Wow alot more keeps piling on since I looked at this site. Like I said I got on here to clear things up. I guess that didn't happen at all. The hunter seems to be judged worse and many of you discredited me. Do what you need to do.

The true fact is at the time the only question in anobodys  mind  was could a rifle be used, or did it need to be a muzzleloader. So they did what we were tought 30 years ago in the fire arms safety course and called and asked the question. Mr. Grant said that it could not be killed with a rifle in that unit. Then was asked if it could because the hunter was disabled.  He said he would figure it out. 16 minutes later (documented) he called back and told them they shouldn't use a rifle and muzzleloader was fine. That shows Grant knew the exact unit this was in.

I have been hunting for more than 3 decades. I miss the times when things didn't seem to change so much. I appaud the people on here that seem to know every rule all the time as thinges change. We all try to keep up on everything.  But are not afraid to call and ask for clarification when needed. In this case WDFG didn't just say it was ok, they went and double checked and again gave the ok.
This was a high profile tag, nobody involved wanted any issues in this case.

Worst part on this forum is the hunter has had some very bad things said about him. He is one of the most generous good people alive. And has done more for the elk than 95% of the hunters in this state combined.
If this is true then Mr Grant should be reprimanded.

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk

Agree. I believe the department hoped this would go away. A few people that didn't know the details kept the pressure on and the county caved to that pressure.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: grundy53 on May 21, 2016, 08:22:33 AM
Wow alot more keeps piling on since I looked at this site. Like I said I got on here to clear things up. I guess that didn't happen at all. The hunter seems to be judged worse and many of you discredited me. Do what you need to do.

The true fact is at the time the only question in anobodys  mind  was could a rifle be used, or did it need to be a muzzleloader. So they did what we were tought 30 years ago in the fire arms safety course and called and asked the question. Mr. Grant said that it could not be killed with a rifle in that unit. Then was asked if it could because the hunter was disabled.  He said he would figure it out. 16 minutes later (documented) he called back and told them they shouldn't use a rifle and muzzleloader was fine. That shows Grant knew the exact unit this was in.

I have been hunting for more than 3 decades. I miss the times when things didn't seem to change so much. I appaud the people on here that seem to know every rule all the time as thinges change. We all try to keep up on everything.  But are not afraid to call and ask for clarification when needed. In this case WDFG didn't just say it was ok, they went and double checked and again gave the ok.
This was a high profile tag, nobody involved wanted any issues in this case.

Worst part on this forum is the hunter has had some very bad things said about him. He is one of the most generous good people alive. And has done more for the elk than 95% of the hunters in this state combined.
If this is true then Mr Grant should be reprimanded.

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk

Agree. I believe the department hoped this would go away. A few people that didn't know the details kept the pressure on and the county caved to that pressure.
I'm glad the county did the right thing.

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: TheHunt on May 21, 2016, 08:24:50 AM
Depending on the date when this "hunt" occurred, there is a antlerless hunt in that unit mid November until mid December. You could the WDFW office and say: I'm elk hunting and I'm not sure if I can hunt with a mod rifle or not, can you help me out? Response: Where are you? I'll check and call you back. Ring: You can hunt there but it's a firearms restricted area, so shotgun, muzzle loader or bow. Response: Thanks!

Thing is the other elk that was shot in a "yard" was legal. This elk was not, ever! Oh yea, it was shot in a yard too!

Mr. Grant knew the exact bull that was was going to be taken. There was no trickery or word's twisted  in this case. At the time he gave gave the good to go he was up for promotion. Since then he has gotten it and tried hard to distance himself from this. He is an honest guy and will tell the truth on the stand. And that will be that he double checked to make sure it was all good.

I'm curious are you testifying in the case. Your  giving the impression that you know specific details related to the case, which is interesting because generally open forum web conversation about "facts" of a case are normally not recommended by either side. And I'm sure Grant would not appreciate the nature at which he is being thrown under the bus in regards to his alleged involvement.

At this point I have not been asked to testify. I will have no problem doing so and telling them what I know if they do ask. But I really doubt this case ends up in court, the charge was a result of relentless pressure from a few.

I agree with you on your last comment.  I think there is the relentless pressure of a few. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bobcat on May 21, 2016, 08:25:09 AM
Sorry but this makes no sense to me. Who calls the WDFW and asks about hunting in a unit that is closed? Why would that even be considered an option? I don't believe it happened that way. Not in a million years would I ever think to call and ask permission to illegally kill an elk.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: idahohuntr on May 21, 2016, 08:27:00 AM
If Reichert had not been previously charged and punished for lying to investigators about illegal elk hunting...I might believe him.  I doubt seriously an officer gave clear guidance that it was legal to kill this bull...if he did, then once reichert is convicted and stripped of his hunting priveleges sportsmen need to seek removal of this officer for his involvement in this criminal activity.

Kitti, you still haven't answered my very simple question.  What about the regs caused you to call wdfw regarding the legality of shooting this bull?  Obviously you knew something wasn't right.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on May 21, 2016, 08:27:07 AM
Sorry but this makes no sense to me. Who calls the WDFW and asks about hunting in a unit that is closed? Why would that even be considered an option? I don't believe it happened that way. Not in a million years would I ever think to call and ask permission to illegally kill an elk.

Entitlement?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on May 21, 2016, 08:30:47 AM

The true fact is at the time the only question in anobodys  mind  was could a rifle be used, or did it need to be a muzzleloader. So they did what we were tought 30 years ago in the fire arms safety course and called and asked the question. Mr. Grant said that it could not be killed with a rifle in that unit. Then was asked if it could because the hunter was disabled.  He said he would figure it out. 16 minutes later (documented) he called back and told them they shouldn't use a rifle and muzzleloader was fine. That shows Grant knew the exact unit this was in.

So, why was the only question in anyone's mind about whether a modern rifle could be used. Did anyone not question if it was OK to shoot s bull in 334? Was that an oversight on everyone's part (maybe including Mr. Grant) that 334 was closed for the raffle or auction tags? That's what it sounds like to me........a mistake on everyone's part not knowing that 334 was closed. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Kazekurt on May 21, 2016, 08:37:26 AM
He is one of the most generous good people alive. And has done more for the elk than 95% of the hunters in this state combined.

 What more has he done than the bidder $1000 behind his bid wouldn't have done?

While I appreciate the  contributions this guy has made to conservation, One can certainly also argue that  by being involved in two high-profile cases  in which wildlife rules were violated,  (either knowingly or unknowingly,  it really doesn't matter the damage is the same) he has probably done more damage to the hunting community than 95% of the people on here.  It only takes one "Cecil the lion" to do a lot of damage.   Unfortunately, trophy hunting already carries a negative stigma with most of the non-hunting population  so when a trophy hunter violates rules  in an effort to take the biggest baddest animal around it provides them more ammunition to push for changes and  regulations that cripple the tradition and means of  subsidence that many of us cherish.   I am quite certain based upon Mr. Reichert  available resources , that he has lawyers on retainer and advisors that could know the game pamphlet backwards and forwards and advise him if he wanted that.  I personally hunt three states. I make an effort each year to read the pamphlet for each state  so I am aware of the rules and regulations I will be expected to follow.  The bottom line is That  with some hunters, the end justifies the means.  If they  have a certain animal targeted, they will do what it takes to get it.   There is no doubt in my mind Mr. Reichert could have chose 100 quality bulls to shoot legally with that tag But choose to push the limits on one that involved some gray area.  People on here can claim all they want that he did not know that he was in a unit not open to branch antler Bulls.  That is your right to claim that and probably smart  from a legal standpoint but recognize that the vast, vast majority of people who hear about this case will not believe you.  In the end, your "ignorance and permission granted" argument may suffice to stave of prosecution but the damage is already done.  The outcome of Mr Reicherts legal proceedings will do little to stem the black eye the hunting community has suffered as a result of this debacle.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JimmyHoffa on May 21, 2016, 08:39:53 AM
 :yeah:
The bad press he's just generated has probably done more bad than the last decade of good by all elk hunters including him.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Skillet on May 21, 2016, 08:40:43 AM

The true fact is at the time the only question in anobodys  mind  was could a rifle be used, or did it need to be a muzzleloader. So they did what we were tought 30 years ago in the fire arms safety course and called and asked the question. Mr. Grant said that it could not be killed with a rifle in that unit. Then was asked if it could because the hunter was disabled.  He said he would figure it out. 16 minutes later (documented) he called back and told them they shouldn't use a rifle and muzzleloader was fine. That shows Grant knew the exact unit this was in.

So, why was the only question in anyone's mind about whether a modern rifle could be used. Did anyone not question if it was OK to shoot s bull in 334? Was that an oversight on everyone's part (maybe including Mr. Grant) that 334 was closed for the raffle or auction tags? That's what it sounds like to me........a mistake on everyone's part not knowing that 334 was closed. 
I tend to agree with Curly.  The wrong issue was being addressed in the calls between the wdfw and the accused, and the answer to the wrong question was used to justify the illegal take of this bull.  This demonstrates either a gross incompetence or deliberate attempt to skirt the law.

I liken it to a mugger calling a local police precinct if he can carry a pistol in a gun-free zone.  And, after being told no, he just conducts his muggings with a switchblade instead.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Kazekurt on May 21, 2016, 09:01:36 AM
I would like to issue a challenge to MR. Reichert.  Since your supporters on this site have clearly tried to  emphasize the numerous positive contributions you have made to conservation and hunting  over the handful of alleged indiscretions  you have been linked too; I'm assuming a champion of conservation like yourself would not want an animal in  his trophy room that had any stigma of indescretion associated with it.  If you are found innocent of all charges and allowed to keep the bull I challenge you to pay to have the bull taxidermied and then to donate it to the city of Ellensburg to be put on display in a public building and thereby enjoyed  in perpetuity by the local residents who have come to love that bull. I believe such an act would go a long way towards showing that you are in fact the man that your supporters  characterize you to be and would somewhat mitigate the negative stigma associated with your hunt; especially in the area in which the bull was taken.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: idahohuntr on May 21, 2016, 09:01:57 AM
He is one of the most generous good people alive. And has done more for the elk than 95% of the hunters in this state combined.

 What more has he done than the bidder $1000 behind his bid wouldn't have done?

While I appreciate the  contributions this guy has made to conservation, One can certainly also argue that  by being involved in two high-profile cases  in which wildlife rules were violated,  (either knowingly or unknowingly,  it really doesn't matter the damage is the same) he has probably done more damage to the hunting community than 95% of the people on here.  It only takes one "Cecil the lion" to do a lot of damage.   Unfortunately, trophy hunting already carries a negative stigma with most of the non-hunting population  so when a trophy hunter violates rules  in an effort to take the biggest baddest animal around it provides them more ammunition to push for changes and  regulations that cripple the tradition and means of  subsidence that many of us cherish.   I am quite certain based upon Mr. Reichert  available resources , that he has lawyers on retainer and advisors that could know the game pamphlet backwards and forwards and advise him if he wanted that.  I personally hunt three states. I make an effort each year to read the pamphlet for each state  so I am aware of the rules and regulations I will be expected to follow.  The bottom line is That  with some hunters, the end justifies the means.  If they  have a certain animal targeted, they will do what it takes to get it.   There is no doubt in my mind Mr. Reichert could have chose 100 quality bulls to shoot legally with that tag But choose to push the limits on one that involved some gray area.  People on here can claim all they want that he did not know that he was in a unit not open to branch antler Bulls.  That is your right to claim that and probably smart  from a legal standpoint but recognize that the vast, vast majority of people who hear about this case will not believe you.  In the end, your "ignorance and permission granted" argument may suffice to stave of prosecution but the damage is already done.  The outcome of Mr Reicherts legal proceedings will do little to stem the black eye the hunting community has suffered as a result of this debacle.
Very well said!

I would also point out from a financial perspective...these raffle and auction tags are specks of dust in a budget.  Just us commoners in E wa combined pay more for conservation and wildlife in one year than reichert has in his lifetime...even if we include his criminal fines :chuckle:

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Landowner on May 21, 2016, 09:22:28 AM
The issue for me is why this tag holder was intent on killing a bull that had a well known reputation of being tame under any reasonable hunting standard.  This bull appears to have let his natural guard and instincts down because he was  a part of the community, so to speak.     

And the landowner who let him do it, well, that's a another troubling matter in my book.   

Remarkable.  Time to find a new sport, maybe bird watching. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JLS on May 21, 2016, 09:36:14 AM
From the very beginning this was never going to end well.  Stevie Wonder could see that. 

Probably the most concise assessment of this entire mess, right there.

Regardless of what Mr. Reichert spends annually on rich man/auction tags, he has cost us all with this episode.  The fact that he would WANT to kill this bull makes me question everything about his conservation ethic.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Kazekurt on May 21, 2016, 09:55:58 AM
He is one of the most generous good people alive. And has done more for the elk than 95% of the hunters in this state combined.

 What more has he done than the bidder $1000 behind his bid wouldn't have done?

I couldn't agree more with hunt fool.  While I'm not disputing that the money is put to good use; the stigma painting auction tags as an altruistic act of conservation is false IMHO.  To be altruistic, the doner would simply donate $50k for the good of the species with  no expected return.  With auction tags, the winner simply pays market price( or something close)for a sweet tag. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on May 21, 2016, 09:57:27 AM
 On a side note he just may have accidently  improved Washingtons supreme Court next year. Prosecuting what  the progressive wetsiders see as  a  trophy hunter  might get  him votes and Madsen replaced. Sure hope it does!

http://www.seattlepi.com/local/politics/article/Chief-Justice-Madsen-draws-a-challenger-7692651.php?roi=echo3-34770541482-35460313-2959ce9dabff170bd91e0e35367ce109&
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 21, 2016, 09:58:45 AM
From the very beginning this was never going to end well.  Stevie Wonder could see that. 

Probably the most concise assessment of this entire mess, right there.

Regardless of what Mr. Reichert spends annually on rich man/auction tags, he has cost us all with this episode.  The fact that he would WANT to kill this bull makes me question everything about his conservation ethic.

Yes he has, and more than anything I resent the stigma he has cast over the hunting community with this reckless and irresponsible act.  We as hunters have not done a thing to bring this mess on, but those who oppose hunting will attempt to use this incident as a broad brush to tar us with. 

But for Mr Reichert et all's actions there would be no controversy.  And just to clear something up, I sent an email, made one phone call and paid one visit to the Prosecutor's Office.  The call and visit were to ask a question or two and the email was to encourage prosecution if that is where the evidence leads.  And that is a stone cold natural fact. 

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: STIKNSTRINGBOW on May 21, 2016, 10:19:54 AM
Not involved in this, but much like a vehicle accident, I cannot help but look...

What sticks out to me is the REMOVAL of the animal from the place it was harvested in 334 and relocated to 338 prior to being processed, that demonstrates an action that clearly indicates the knowledge that it was in a closed unit, and an attempt to misrepresent the location of the kill.
They just got caught.  :twocents:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: HntnFsh on May 21, 2016, 10:24:08 AM
Not involved in this, but much like a vehicle accident, I cannot help but look...

What sticks out to me is the REMOVAL of the animal from the place it was harvested in 334 and relocated to 338 prior to being processed, that demonstrates an action that clearly indicates the knowledge that it was in a closed unit, and an attempt to misrepresent the location of the kill.
They just got caught.  :twocents:

Or it could mean that the property owner didn't want a gut pile in his field so they took it somewhere else to do that.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on May 21, 2016, 10:28:58 AM
Not involved in this, but much like a vehicle accident, I cannot help but look...

What sticks out to me is the REMOVAL of the animal from the place it was harvested in 334 and relocated to 338 prior to being processed, that demonstrates an action that clearly indicates the knowledge that it was in a closed unit, and an attempt to misrepresent the location of the kill.
They just got caught.  :twocents:


A lot of folks see issue with the fact that this happened. I don't. We hunt farmer's fields all the time. I don't like to leave gut piles in the middle of a wheat stubble field and those fields are out in the middle of nowhere.  If this hunt went down as close to the houses and such as it presumably did, I wouldn't want to leave the gutpile there either. I can see their reasoning in removing it. That's all. Not standing up for this hunt or anything. Just saying...There may very well be good reason for this.

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: STIKNSTRINGBOW on May 21, 2016, 11:02:30 AM
Removal from the field, I understand.
I have done that also, however taking it into a different unit?
I also understand that the boundary might be as close as across the road, in the article it states it was relocated to a different field.
just smells fishy...
But then, I am jealous. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jmscon on May 21, 2016, 11:46:52 AM
I'm all for innocent until proven guilty! I am guilty of passing judgement on this guy because of the emotions that I have against situations like this. After reading most of the other threads about this issue, most people on here are just as guilty as I am and have similar emotions as I do concerning this incident.

With the limited info that we have of the incident and the knowledge of what is listed in the regs and game laws we assume that there was no way that TR was acting legally. I hope as a resident of this state and a citizen of this country that he is given a fair trial. Then and only if all the truth comes out will we know the whole story.

We know that unit 334 is closed to branch antler bull hunting. I think that changes this year and will be up to WDFW discretion, as far as the raffle and auctions tags go. And the way it appears, this guy either made the exception himself or was able to get an ok from the state to be an exception from the rules. The way this appears is maddening! I don't think the rest of us would be able to get this ok. If he did in fact get permission from a WDFW officer that's where my jealousy comes in, how does he get special privileges? Money that I will never get close to in my lifetime?

I doubt that I will ever have the means to win an auction tag but if I did I would make every effort to abide by the laws and I suspect that everyone else in the state would expect the same from me.

Some of the questions I have, and maybe kiticaas can clear this up, are:

-Who was with TR?

-Was it a guide?

-Did TR make the call or was it another person in the party?

You'd think a guide wouldn't even take him into the unit!

I hope that WDFW didn't give permission. Not that I want to see the book thrown at him if he is found guilty but for the sake of WDFW. I would hope that they wouldn't make exceptions to the game laws for individuals!!! If someone in WDFW gave him the ok I hope that they get severely reprimanded!!!

 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: mfswallace on May 21, 2016, 11:57:25 AM
IF Sgt. Grant did get or give the ok, I'm sure this will lead to others "making a call" and doing what they want.

PopeSHawn
If TR gets off because of this "call" will case law precedent be set or will it just be a first instance and it needs more actual cases to be hard and fast??

if so you can bet it will be happening more often!!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on May 21, 2016, 12:02:12 PM
Removal from the field, I understand.
I have done that also, however taking it into a different unit?
I also understand that the boundary might be as close as across the road, in the article it states it was relocated to a different field.
just smells fishy...
But then, I am jealous. 
One of the guys who was involved in the caping and gutting of the bull has a shop in the other unit. My guesstimate is they took it there to use his shop. I bet that's their reasoning.

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bradslam on May 21, 2016, 12:10:52 PM
I would like to issue a challenge to MR. Reichert.  Since your supporters on this site have clearly tried to  emphasize the numerous positive contributions you have made to conservation and hunting  over the handful of alleged indiscretions  you have been linked too; I'm assuming a champion of conservation like yourself would not want an animal in  his trophy room that had any stigma of indescretion associated with it.  If you are found innocent of all charges and allowed to keep the bull I challenge you to pay to have the bull taxidermied and then to donate it to the city of Ellensburg to be put on display in a public building and thereby enjoyed  in perpetuity by the local residents who have come to love that bull. I believe such an act would go a long way towards showing that you are in fact the man that your supporters  characterize you to be and would somewhat mitigate the negative stigma associated with your hunt; especially in the area in which the bull was taken.

 :yeah:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on May 21, 2016, 12:51:00 PM
I guess I'm just not clear on how some of you feel about this.

Could you all restate your positions one more time?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jmscon on May 21, 2016, 12:52:56 PM
 :yeah: :beatdeadhorse:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on May 21, 2016, 01:24:37 PM
From the very beginning this was never going to end well.  Stevie Wonder could see that. 

Probably the most concise assessment of this entire mess, right there.

Regardless of what Mr. Reichert spends annually on rich man/auction tags, he has cost us all with this episode.  The fact that he would WANT to kill this bull makes me question everything about his conservation ethic.

Yes he has, and more than anything I resent the stigma he has cast over the hunting community with this reckless and irresponsible act.  We as hunters have not done a thing to bring this mess on, but those who oppose hunting will attempt to use this incident as a broad brush to tar us with. 

But for Mr Reichert et all's actions there would be no controversy.  And just to clear something up, I sent an email, made one phone call and paid one visit to the Prosecutor's Office.  The call and visit were to ask a question or two and the email was to encourage prosecution if that is where the evidence leads.  And that is a stone cold natural fact.

That stigma was very well promoted by you trying to further your which hunt on forums all the way to the east coast.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on May 21, 2016, 01:54:43 PM
He is one of the most generous good people alive. And has done more for the elk than 95% of the hunters in this state combined.

 What more has he done than the bidder $1000 behind his bid wouldn't have done?

While I appreciate the  contributions this guy has made to conservation, One can certainly also argue that  by being involved in two high-profile cases  in which wildlife rules were violated,  (either knowingly or unknowingly,  it really doesn't matter the damage is the same) he has probably done more damage to the hunting community than 95% of the people on here.  It only takes one "Cecil the lion" to do a lot of damage.   Unfortunately, trophy hunting already carries a negative stigma with most of the non-hunting population  so when a trophy hunter violates rules  in an effort to take the biggest baddest animal around it provides them more ammunition to push for changes and  regulations that cripple the tradition and means of  subsidence that many of us cherish.   I am quite certain based upon Mr. Reichert  available resources , that he has lawyers on retainer and advisors that could know the game pamphlet backwards and forwards and advise him if he wanted that.  I personally hunt three states. I make an effort each year to read the pamphlet for each state  so I am aware of the rules and regulations I will be expected to follow.  The bottom line is That  with some hunters, the end justifies the means.  If they  have a certain animal targeted, they will do what it takes to get it.   There is no doubt in my mind Mr. Reichert could have chose 100 quality bulls to shoot legally with that tag But choose to push the limits on one that involved some gray area.  People on here can claim all they want that he did not know that he was in a unit not open to branch antler Bulls.  That is your right to claim that and probably smart  from a legal standpoint but recognize that the vast, vast majority of people who hear about this case will not believe you.  In the end, your "ignorance and permission granted" argument may suffice to stave of prosecution but the damage is already done.  The outcome of Mr Reicherts legal proceedings will do little to stem the black eye the hunting community has suffered as a result of this debacle.

 Exceptional post right there!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: M_ray on May 21, 2016, 01:56:51 PM
He is one of the most generous good people alive. And has done more for the elk than 95% of the hunters in this state combined.

 What more has he done than the bidder $1000 behind his bid wouldn't have done?

Well if you paid any attention,  I believe it was last year he bid up his own bI'd by another 5k when it was clear there was not another bid coming in.

 Wow, I stand corrected, his $5k is indeed more for elk than 95% of the rest of the hunters in this state have done combined. :chuckle:  :mor:

Guess the moron sign was pointed to me. That's fine All I was trying to do here is tell the honest side of the story of a good man that has put hundreds of thousands of dollars into it in the last few years.

The situation last season was unfortunate.  The honest truth is nobody involved in the situation tried to get around anything or cheat any rules. They checked,  and Grant double checked to make sure it was all on the up and up.

  :rolleyes: The two guys guiding TR grew up in the valley and knew full well that that bull was in 334 no if's and's or but's about it. In fact BR was told face to face to "STOP" going after that bull!" And I believe CC was too.

 So again tell us just what you are clearing up for us all? Using words like "honest" and "most generous" "they checked" doesn't clear anything up, please convince me that two guys that fancy themselves upcoming Mossback guides and a guy who has bought what? 20 or more gov and auction tags in his lifetime cant understand that 334 is closed to branch bull hunting and don't know where they are?  :o 

 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: time2hunt on May 21, 2016, 02:14:27 PM
M-Ray your such a little gossip queen please tell me who told me to stop f-ing with that bull ??? As I have said earlier I had no part in guiding TR on that hunt since I had been archery hunting the two weeks prior in the Okanogan. I was ask if I would help gut and cape the bull for TR. So yes I'm guilty for helping a friend. So Let the court figure this out mess out. Peace out till it goes to court.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on May 21, 2016, 02:24:22 PM
M-Ray your such a little gossip queen please tell me who told me to stop f-ing with that bull ??? As I have said earlier I had no part in guiding TR on that hunt since I had been archery hunting the two weeks prior in the Okanogan. I was ask if I would help gut and cape the bull for TR. So yes I'm guilty for helping a friend. So Let the court figure this out mess out. Peace out till it goes to court.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Exactly. He will not tell you who said that because nobody did. This would not even be a story without a few seattle and tacoma guys fabricating the truth. Page after page they say things like this. But will not back it up with with names.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jmscon on May 21, 2016, 02:31:32 PM
That's all we do here in the big city is fabricate! Fabrication capitol of the state! :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Antlershed on May 21, 2016, 02:36:42 PM
Allegedly...If there really was confusion of the regs, or special permission was trying to be obtained, why wasn't the question on the phone,"Hey, I have the raffle tag, is there any way I can get permission to shoot a branch antlered bull in 334?"

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on May 21, 2016, 02:42:15 PM
M-Ray your such a little gossip queen please tell me who told me to stop f-ing with that bull ??? As I have said earlier I had no part in guiding TR on that hunt since I had been archery hunting the two weeks prior in the Okanogan. I was ask if I would help gut and cape the bull for TR. So yes I'm guilty for helping a friend. So Let the court figure this out mess out. Peace out till it goes to court.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on May 21, 2016, 02:44:53 PM
M-Ray your such a little gossip queen please tell me who told me to stop f-ing with that bull ??? As I have said earlier I had no part in guiding TR on that hunt since I had been archery hunting the two weeks prior in the Okanogan. I was ask if I would help gut and cape the bull for TR. So yes I'm guilty for helping a friend. So Let the court figure this out mess out. Peace out till it goes to court.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Exactly. He will not tell you who said that because nobody did. This would not even be a story without a few seattle and tacoma guys fabricating the truth. Page after page they say things like this. But will not back it up with with names.
No offense, but with you throwing out the lawsuit word all over the last few pages of this thread, why would anyone mention any names?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jmscon on May 21, 2016, 02:51:12 PM
Please reread my post on the previous page
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: time2hunt on May 21, 2016, 02:51:51 PM
Please don't associate me with kitcaashunt I have no clue who this person is. The lawsuit was made by a separate party.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on May 21, 2016, 02:52:48 PM
Please don't associate me with kitcaashunt I have no clue who this person is. The lawsuit was made by a separate party.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Huh..interesting, and noted.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 21, 2016, 03:03:03 PM
From the very beginning this was never going to end well.  Stevie Wonder could see that. 

Probably the most concise assessment of this entire mess, right there.

 The fact that he would WANT to kill this bull makes me question everything about his conservation ethic.

Regardless of what Mr. Reichert spends annually on rich man/auction tags, he has cost us all with this episode.

Yes he has, and more than anything I resent the stigma he has cast over the hunting community with this reckless and irresponsible act.  We as hunters have not done a thing to bring this mess on, but those who oppose hunting will attempt to use this incident as a broad brush to tar us with. 

But for Mr Reichert et all's actions there would be no controversy.  And just to clear something up, I sent an email, made one phone call and paid one visit to the Prosecutor's Office.  The call and visit were to ask a question or two and the email was to encourage prosecution if that is where the evidence leads.  And that is a stone cold natural fact.



That stigma was very well promoted by you trying to further your which hunt on forums all the way to the east coast.

You referring to this thread that was 41 pages before I joined it? 

3125263 - Mon Sep 23 2013 05:52 PM Re: elk gov tag [Re: jakesroost]



you are correct that Tod has had past problems/issues. What I can assuredly tell you 100% is that while tod was with ECO he was a fine upstanding man and we didn't need dig up his or anyone else's "skeletons." He explained to Jack early on during their phone conversations the incident you are referring to. Jack was confident that Tod had seen the error of his ways and paid his "debt to society" so to speak and he started on a clean slate when he came to ECO.

The bull was killed on State forest land not national forest land so there is no concern in that aspect. ECO runs a tight ship and there is no room for rule breakers or rule stretchers among our ranks! THAT IS 100% TRUTH
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on May 21, 2016, 03:09:25 PM
It'll be nice when this is over, or the draw results come out, maybe then we can talk about rifles and huntin.... Naw I'm sure the the whiners will still be whining , about something ..
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on May 21, 2016, 03:11:41 PM
From the very beginning this was never going to end well.  Stevie Wonder could see that. 

Probably the most concise assessment of this entire mess, right there.

 The fact that he would WANT to kill this bull makes me question everything about his conservation ethic.

Regardless of what Mr. Reichert spends annually on rich man/auction tags, he has cost us all with this episode.

Yes he has, and more than anything I resent the stigma he has cast over the hunting community with this reckless and irresponsible act.  We as hunters have not done a thing to bring this mess on, but those who oppose hunting will attempt to use this incident as a broad brush to tar us with. 

But for Mr Reichert et all's actions there would be no controversy.  And just to clear something up, I sent an email, made one phone call and paid one visit to the Prosecutor's Office.  The call and visit were to ask a question or two and the email was to encourage prosecution if that is where the evidence leads.  And that is a stone cold natural fact.



That stigma was very well promoted by you trying to further your which hunt on forums all the way to the east coast.

You referring to this thread that was 41 pages before I joined it? 

3125263 - Mon Sep 23 2013 05:52 PM Re: elk gov tag [Re: jakesroost]



you are correct that Tod has had past problems/issues. What I can assuredly tell you 100% is that while tod was with ECO he was a fine upstanding man and we didn't need dig up his or anyone else's "skeletons." He explained to Jack early on during their phone conversations the incident you are referring to. Jack was confident that Tod had seen the error of his ways and paid his "debt to society" so to speak and he started on a clean slate when he came to ECO.

The bull was killed on State forest land not national forest land so there is no concern in that aspect. ECO runs a tight ship and there is no room for rule breakers or rule stretchers among our ranks! THAT IS 100% TRUTH
What the heck...
What does a thread comment from 3 years ago have anything to do with anything?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on May 21, 2016, 03:13:16 PM
From the very beginning this was never going to end well.  Stevie Wonder could see that. 

Probably the most concise assessment of this entire mess, right there.

 The fact that he would WANT to kill this bull makes me question everything about his conservation ethic.

Regardless of what Mr. Reichert spends annually on rich man/auction tags, he has cost us all with this episode.

Yes he has, and more than anything I resent the stigma he has cast over the hunting community with this reckless and irresponsible act.  We as hunters have not done a thing to bring this mess on, but those who oppose hunting will attempt to use this incident as a broad brush to tar us with. 

But for Mr Reichert et all's actions there would be no controversy.  And just to clear something up, I sent an email, made one phone call and paid one visit to the Prosecutor's Office.  The call and visit were to ask a question or two and the email was to encourage prosecution if that is where the evidence leads.  And that is a stone cold natural fact.



That stigma was very well promoted by you trying to further your which hunt on forums all the way to the east coast.

You referring to this thread that was 41 pages before I joined it? 

3125263 - Mon Sep 23 2013 05:52 PM Re: elk gov tag [Re: jakesroost]



you are correct that Tod has had past problems/issues. What I can assuredly tell you 100% is that while tod was with ECO he was a fine upstanding man and we didn't need dig up his or anyone else's "skeletons." He explained to Jack early on during their phone conversations the incident you are referring to. Jack was confident that Tod had seen the error of his ways and paid his "debt to society" so to speak and he started on a clean slate when he came to ECO.

The bull was killed on State forest land not national forest land so there is no concern in that aspect. ECO runs a tight ship and there is no room for rule breakers or rule stretchers among our ranks! THAT IS 100% TRUTH
What the heck...
What does a thread comment from 3 years ago have anything to do with anything?


Is this post even from this forum?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: TVHunts on May 21, 2016, 03:13:31 PM
He is one of the most generous good people alive. And has done more for the elk than 95% of the hunters in this state combined.

 What more has he done than the bidder $1000 behind his bid wouldn't have done?

While I appreciate the  contributions this guy has made to conservation, One can certainly also argue that  by being involved in two high-profile cases  in which wildlife rules were violated,  (either knowingly or unknowingly,  it really doesn't matter the damage is the same) he has probably done more damage to the hunting community than 95% of the people on here.  It only takes one "Cecil the lion" to do a lot of damage.   Unfortunately, trophy hunting already carries a negative stigma with most of the non-hunting population  so when a trophy hunter violates rules  in an effort to take the biggest baddest animal around it provides them more ammunition to push for changes and  regulations that cripple the tradition and means of  subsidence that many of us cherish.   I am quite certain based upon Mr. Reichert  available resources , that he has lawyers on retainer and advisors that could know the game pamphlet backwards and forwards and advise him if he wanted that.  I personally hunt three states. I make an effort each year to read the pamphlet for each state  so I am aware of the rules and regulations I will be expected to follow.  The bottom line is That  with some hunters, the end justifies the means.  If they  have a certain animal targeted, they will do what it takes to get it.   There is no doubt in my mind Mr. Reichert could have chose 100 quality bulls to shoot legally with that tag But choose to push the limits on one that involved some gray area.  People on here can claim all they want that he did not know that he was in a unit not open to branch antler Bulls.  That is your right to claim that and probably smart  from a legal standpoint but recognize that the vast, vast majority of people who hear about this case will not believe you.  In the end, your "ignorance and permission granted" argument may suffice to stave of prosecution but the damage is already done.  The outcome of Mr Reicherts legal proceedings will do little to stem the black eye the hunting community has suffered as a result of this debacle.

You Sir are spot on!  Well said.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 21, 2016, 03:20:25 PM
From the very beginning this was never going to end well.  Stevie Wonder could see that. 

Probably the most concise assessment of this entire mess, right there.

 The fact that he would WANT to kill this bull makes me question everything about his conservation ethic.

Regardless of what Mr. Reichert spends annually on rich man/auction tags, he has cost us all with this episode.

Yes he has, and more than anything I resent the stigma he has cast over the hunting community with this reckless and irresponsible act.  We as hunters have not done a thing to bring this mess on, but those who oppose hunting will attempt to use this incident as a broad brush to tar us with. 

But for Mr Reichert et all's actions there would be no controversy.  And just to clear something up, I sent an email, made one phone call and paid one visit to the Prosecutor's Office.  The call and visit were to ask a question or two and the email was to encourage prosecution if that is where the evidence leads.  And that is a stone cold natural fact.



That stigma was very well promoted by you trying to further your which hunt on forums all the way to the east coast.

You referring to this thread that was 41 pages before I joined it? 

3125263 - Mon Sep 23 2013 05:52 PM Re: elk gov tag [Re: jakesroost]



you are correct that Tod has had past problems/issues. What I can assuredly tell you 100% is that while tod was with ECO he was a fine upstanding man and we didn't need dig up his or anyone else's "skeletons." He explained to Jack early on during their phone conversations the incident you are referring to. Jack was confident that Tod had seen the error of his ways and paid his "debt to society" so to speak and he started on a clean slate when he came to ECO.

The bull was killed on State forest land not national forest land so there is no concern in that aspect. ECO runs a tight ship and there is no room for rule breakers or rule stretchers among our ranks! THAT IS 100% TRUTH
What the heck...
What does a thread comment from 3 years ago have anything to do with anything?


Is this post even from this forum?

No it is from a forum back east.  The thread is 42 pages long and in that thread Mr Reichert does not fare so well.  It is hard to locate it using a search engine.  I was introduced to it via someone who sent me an email.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnfmly on May 21, 2016, 03:35:25 PM
Kit & time
 Thank you for the real story
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: M_ray on May 21, 2016, 03:40:13 PM
M-Ray your such a little gossip queen please tell me who told me to stop f-ing with that bull ??? As I have said earlier I had no part in guiding TR on that hunt since I had been archery hunting the two weeks prior in the Okanogan. I was ask if I would help gut and cape the bull for TR. So yes I'm guilty for helping a friend. So Let the court figure this out mess out. Peace out till it goes to court.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Exactly. He will not tell you who said that because nobody did. This would not even be a story without a few seattle and tacoma guys fabricating the truth. Page after page they say things like this. But will not back it up with with names.

Lol ...Harry told both you and CC! I also find it strange time2hunt that you were there every step of te way all week driving around with TR and then your not there for the 20 min he shoots it ... Then you show up for the gut party? I held up my end and told you who told you to lay off ... Now tell me do I have the rest of this wrong?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: time2hunt on May 21, 2016, 03:45:03 PM
Wow haven't spoke to Harry in over a year. And like I said archery hunting up North so you better check and get your story straight.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: M_ray on May 21, 2016, 03:51:10 PM
Wow haven't spoke to Harry in over a year. And like I said archery hunting up North so you better check and get your story straight.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

He will be interested to know you are calling him a liar ...  :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: time2hunt on May 21, 2016, 03:53:55 PM
He knows my number  tell him to call me so at least he can say he talked with me this year.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on May 21, 2016, 04:00:18 PM
From the very beginning this was never going to end well.  Stevie Wonder could see that. 

Probably the most concise assessment of this entire mess, right there.

 The fact that he would WANT to kill this bull makes me question everything about his conservation ethic.

Regardless of what Mr. Reichert spends annually on rich man/auction tags, he has cost us all with this episode.

Yes he has, and more than anything I resent the stigma he has cast over the hunting community with this reckless and irresponsible act.  We as hunters have not done a thing to bring this mess on, but those who oppose hunting will attempt to use this incident as a broad brush to tar us with. 

But for Mr Reichert et all's actions there would be no controversy.  And just to clear something up, I sent an email, made one phone call and paid one visit to the Prosecutor's Office.  The call and visit were to ask a question or two and the email was to encourage prosecution if that is where the evidence leads.  And that is a stone cold natural fact.



That stigma was very well promoted by you trying to further your which hunt on forums all the way to the east coast.

You referring to this thread that was 41 pages before I joined it? 

3125263 - Mon Sep 23 2013 05:52 PM Re: elk gov tag [Re: jakesroost]



you are correct that Tod has had past problems/issues. What I can assuredly tell you 100% is that while tod was with ECO he was a fine upstanding man and we didn't need dig up his or anyone else's "skeletons." He explained to Jack early on during their phone conversations the incident you are referring to. Jack was confident that Tod had seen the error of his ways and paid his "debt to society" so to speak and he started on a clean slate when he came to ECO.

The bull was killed on State forest land not national forest land so there is no concern in that aspect. ECO runs a tight ship and there is no room for rule breakers or rule stretchers among our ranks! THAT IS 100% TRUTH
What the heck...
What does a thread comment from 3 years ago have anything to do with anything?


Is this post even from this forum?

No it is from a forum back east.  The thread is 42 pages long and in that thread Mr Reichert does not fare so well.  It is hard to locate it using a search engine.  I was introduced to it via someone who sent me an email.

That you resurrected after it had been dead for 3 years.
:chuckle:
Wow.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Backstraps on May 21, 2016, 04:04:38 PM
Allegedly...If there really was confusion of the regs, or special permission was trying to be obtained, why wasn't the question on the phone,"Hey, I have the raffle tag, is there any way I can get permission to shoot a branch antlered bull in 334?"
My thoughts exactly Brent! I would be interested to know if this question was asked on the phone?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: M_ray on May 21, 2016, 04:19:54 PM
He knows my number  tell him to call me so at least he can say he talked with me this year.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No one said he told you THIS year  :dunno:... I think I now know how the wdfw feels about the twist on words   :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on May 21, 2016, 04:22:15 PM
He knows my number  tell him to call me so at least he can say he talked with me this year.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No one said he told you THIS year  :dunno:... I think I now know how the wdfw feels about the twist on words   :chuckle:
He said "so he could say he talked to me "this" year, as in 2016.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: time2hunt on May 21, 2016, 04:24:10 PM
Once again he can call me and stop having his little peacock spouting off for him. I haven't spoke with Harry in over a year. As for the game dept that between Tod and his guide I'm not part of the investigation.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Kazekurt on May 21, 2016, 04:31:33 PM
Kiticasshunter, you clearly seem to know the tag holder so I have a question for you.  When it comes to this individuals hunting exploits is the size of the bull the end all?  Did he ever consider that shooting a bull that was darn near as tame as domestic livestock, well known, and oft photographed might generate  anemosity towards all hunters?  I'm very surprised he choose to burn that tag in this manner considering the opportunities that tag offered him.  Personally, I find little satisfaction in canned hunts but I recognize that not everyone is like me so I won't begrudge another hunter from enjoying the sport in any manner as long as it is legal and ethical.  As a sportsman, however, I always feel an obligation to do my best to represent hunters in a positive  light.  We, hunters, are often our own worst enemy.  When we waste game, make poor ethical decisions involving game, display kills in an undignified manner, hunt in an unsportsmanlike manner, etc we jeopardize the future of hunting.  I figure that roughly 10% of voters hunt.  Another 10% are against hunting so the future of hunting rests with the 80% of voters who don't have a dog in the fight.  I try to always consider how my actions may influence that 80% and do my best to make sure it is for the better.  Anyway, I'm just curious if any of this crossed his mind before he took that shot.  It is my prayer that all of us will do a better job of this in the future so that our grandkids will get to enjoy the same types of hunting experiences that we did. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: M_ray on May 21, 2016, 04:39:44 PM
Once again he can call me and stop having his little peacock spouting off for him. I haven't spoke with Harry in over a year. As for the game dept that between Tod and his guide I'm not part of the investigation.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Fair enough that you aren't part of the investigation ... But as far as making the story straight? I think that's between you and him. It's not my story to make straight it's yours! Harry is one of the most up standing men I've known in my life and I trust that if he tells me something then it's the truth. I've already told you he'd like to talk to you too and everyday that you drive out to the frwy you can't miss his shop so if there is a problem with what I've said it seems to me it's easily remedied by just stopping by to speak with him.   
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: time2hunt on May 21, 2016, 04:41:13 PM
Fair enough :)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: asmith on May 21, 2016, 04:59:47 PM
Shooting this elk was wrong, just like all you hunters who have permission to hunt in wheat fields and alfalfa fields.  I think yall should just stop that kind of hunting altogether, head to the nearest public forest, and give me the location of those fields so I can make sure you don't hunt there anymore ;) :chuckle: :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 21, 2016, 05:35:06 PM
Jacalope,

I was invited to participate and another thread starts


Is it true that the guy who won this tag a few years ago, the one who caused all of the controversy because he was involved in a poaching case, won the tag again this year? I thought the guidelines for being eligible for this tag were changed and this was the exact situation that brought that change about?


To which after reading page after page of things about Mr Reichert that i do not belive are fair I posted this this

I will be right up front with all of you and say that Todd Reichert has a reputation for treating his employees very well and his reputation in the community he lives in is enviable. I don't know the man, but I know of him.

I think he used exceedingly poor judgement in Ellensburg, but I don't believe him to be a bad person. I think he needs to have a "come to Jesus moment" and sit down and evaluate how he has conducted himself in the field the last decade or so and make some changes. I hope his actions in Ellensburg are going to provide the motivation for bureaucrats and politicians to start listening to the issues the rank and file sportsmen have with these Auctions & Raffles and clean up the abuses.


************
I have been participating on a very small forum that is based in PA.  It consists mainly of chuck shooters and one of their members is who directed me to that particular forum where Mr Reichert was being discussed. 

And don't anybody try to construe what I say re: abuses into a blanket statement on raffle or auction tags.

I have made my position on that topic perfectly clear.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on May 21, 2016, 09:07:41 PM
Boy I got dozens of elk, deer, and sheep pics from some nez pierce Indians in Idaho that come over every year to our beloved blues units, and hunt like its wide open, during the rut, or January when they come outta the hills, and kill em with a rifle. Velvet bucks, he really likes it when dummy's post sheep pics on the www from the asotin herd, he just rolls over and kills em, sometimes they roll right into the road... And he laughs and laughs while doing it. this guy would make guys posting here, and Tod look lie a saint..... But it doesn't even rate blurb on the radar. The simple fact is $$$$, if there wasn't so much of it involved folks woulda forgot about this long ago... Google the kill em all gang outta Longview, did they even get mentioned on here??? Or how bout old boy that killed the huge park bull on the skok tag that the kariloen bear dogs found the bones to?? Are they less important?? It sure seems so!!

PS the above mentioned native is killing waaaay over his limit, matter of fact I've been offered to go with him for a price, but never mind him, let's concentrate on the rich guy that buys all your chances...
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Skillet on May 21, 2016, 10:10:44 PM
Holy cow, lots of squirrels to chase there... so, you're complaining that this thread is still on it's original topic of one specific act committed by one specific person?  Sounds like you're carrying an awful burden with the knowledge of the Nez Perce native abuses of SE WA wildlife - would be a great thread for you to start so it could be discussed there.
And,  yes, the Kill em all boys and the park bull got their due attention on here back when they were going concerns.  I don't see how those long-resolved issues have any relevance whatsoever to this current issue regarding a branched bull shot in a GMU closed to all branched bull hunting.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: mfswallace on May 21, 2016, 10:13:41 PM
Boy I got dozens of elk, deer, and sheep pics from some nez pierce Indians in Idaho that come over every year to our beloved blues units, and hunt like its wide open, during the rut, or January when they come outta the hills, and kill em with a rifle. Velvet bucks, he really likes it when dummy's post sheep pics on the www from the asotin herd, he just rolls over and kills em, sometimes they roll right into the road... And he laughs and laughs while doing it. this guy would make guys posting here, and Tod look lie a saint..... But it doesn't even rate blurb on the radar. The simple fact is $$$$, if there wasn't so much of it involved folks woulda forgot about this long ago... Google the kill em all gang outta Longview, did they even get mentioned on here??? Or how bout old boy that killed the huge park bull on the skok tag that the kariloen bear dogs found the bones to?? Are they less important?? It sure seems so!!

PS the above mentioned native is killing waaaay over his limit, matter of fact I've been offered to go with him for a price, but never mind him, let's concentrate on the rich guy that buys all your chances...

By all means sit idly by and allow this continued abuse/violation to continue. Don't think of doing anything about it cause he has no money. U are a pos for even stating you know this goes on and that you have evidence he goes over his limit but are doing nothing about it!!!  Expose this native for his abuse and start the process of getting EVERYONE on the same page :twocents:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jmscon on May 21, 2016, 10:22:44 PM
Boy I got dozens of elk, deer, and sheep pics from some nez pierce Indians in Idaho that come over every year to our beloved blues units, and hunt like its wide open, during the rut, or January when they come outta the hills, and kill em with a rifle. Velvet bucks, he really likes it when dummy's post sheep pics on the www from the asotin herd, he just rolls over and kills em, sometimes they roll right into the road... And he laughs and laughs while doing it. this guy would make guys posting here, and Tod look lie a saint..... But it doesn't even rate blurb on the radar. The simple fact is $$$$, if there wasn't so much of it involved folks woulda forgot about this long ago... Google the kill em all gang outta Longview, did they even get mentioned on here??? Or how bout old boy that killed the huge park bull on the skok tag that the kariloen bear dogs found the bones to?? Are they less important?? It sure seems so!!

PS the above mentioned native is killing waaaay over his limit, matter of fact I've been offered to go with him for a price, but never mind him, let's concentrate on the rich guy that buys all your chances...

Standing by and letting a guy go "waaaay over his limit" and not reporting it then you are pretty much aiding and abetting. Almost as bad as the crime itself!  :tdown:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: mountainman on May 21, 2016, 10:32:04 PM
Boy I got dozens of elk, deer, and sheep pics from some nez pierce Indians in Idaho that come over every year to our beloved blues units, and hunt like its wide open, during the rut, or January when they come outta the hills, and kill em with a rifle. Velvet bucks, he really likes it when dummy's post sheep pics on the www from the asotin herd, he just rolls over and kills em, sometimes they roll right into the road... And he laughs and laughs while doing it. this guy would make guys posting here, and Tod look lie a saint..... But it doesn't even rate blurb on the radar. The simple fact is $$$$, if there wasn't so much of it involved folks woulda forgot about this long ago... Google the kill em all gang outta Longview, did they even get mentioned on here??? Or how bout old boy that killed the huge park bull on the skok tag that the kariloen bear dogs found the bones to?? Are they less important?? It sure seems so!!

PS the above mentioned native is killing waaaay over his limit, matter of fact I've been offered to go with him for a price, but never mind him, let's concentrate on the rich guy that buys all your chances...

By all means sit idly by and allow this continued abuse/violation to continue. Don't think of doing anything about it cause he has no money. U are a pos for even stating you know this goes on and that you have evidence he goes over his limit but are doing nothing about it!!!  Expose this native for his abuse and start the process of getting EVERYONE on the same page :twocents:
👆second that!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on May 21, 2016, 10:32:12 PM
Boy I got dozens of elk, deer, and sheep pics from some nez pierce Indians in Idaho that come over every year to our beloved blues units, and hunt like its wide open, during the rut, or January when they come outta the hills, and kill em with a rifle. Velvet bucks, he really likes it when dummy's post sheep pics on the www from the asotin herd, he just rolls over and kills em, sometimes they roll right into the road... And he laughs and laughs while doing it. this guy would make guys posting here, and Tod look lie a saint..... But it doesn't even rate blurb on the radar. The simple fact is $$$$, if there wasn't so much of it involved folks woulda forgot about this long ago... Google the kill em all gang outta Longview, did they even get mentioned on here??? Or how bout old boy that killed the huge park bull on the skok tag that the kariloen bear dogs found the bones to?? Are they less important?? It sure seems so!!

PS the above mentioned native is killing waaaay over his limit, matter of fact I've been offered to go with him for a price, but never mind him, let's concentrate on the rich guy that buys all your chances...

By all means sit idly by and allow this continued abuse/violation to continue. Don't think of doing anything about it cause he has no money. U are a pos for even stating you know this goes on and that you have evidence he goes over his limit but are doing nothing about it!!!  Expose this native for his abuse and start the process of getting EVERYONE on the same page :twocents:

Easy now, before you call me a *censored*, you just never know who your talking to....
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on May 21, 2016, 10:34:00 PM
Boy I got dozens of elk, deer, and sheep pics from some nez pierce Indians in Idaho that come over every year to our beloved blues units, and hunt like its wide open, during the rut, or January when they come outta the hills, and kill em with a rifle. Velvet bucks, he really likes it when dummy's post sheep pics on the www from the asotin herd, he just rolls over and kills em, sometimes they roll right into the road... And he laughs and laughs while doing it. this guy would make guys posting here, and Tod look lie a saint..... But it doesn't even rate blurb on the radar. The simple fact is $$$$, if there wasn't so much of it involved folks woulda forgot about this long ago... Google the kill em all gang outta Longview, did they even get mentioned on here??? Or how bout old boy that killed the huge park bull on the skok tag that the kariloen bear dogs found the bones to?? Are they less important?? It sure seems so!!

PS the above mentioned native is killing waaaay over his limit, matter of fact I've been offered to go with him for a price, but never mind him, let's concentrate on the rich guy that buys all your chances...

By all means sit idly by and allow this continued abuse/violation to continue. Don't think of doing anything about it cause he has no money. U are a pos for even stating you know this goes on and that you have evidence he goes over his limit but are doing nothing about it!!!  Expose this native for his abuse and start the process of getting EVERYONE on the same page :twocents:
👆second that!

Dewey go back into hiding...
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on May 21, 2016, 10:38:30 PM
Holy cow, lots of squirrels to chase there... so, you're complaining that this thread is still on it's original topic of one specific act committed by one specific person?  Sounds like you're carrying an awful burden with the knowledge of the Nez Perce native abuses of SE WA wildlife - would be a great thread for you to start so it could be discussed there.
And,  yes, the Kill em all boys and the park bull got their due attention on here back when they were going concerns.  I don't see how those long-resolved issues have any relevance whatsoever to this current issue regarding a branched bull shot in a GMU closed to all branched bull hunting.

Feel free to point out where the kill em all boys and the park bull have ate , well half the bandwidth as " Bullwinkle"...

Better yet, 1/4 the bandwidth....
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on May 21, 2016, 10:41:15 PM
Would this conversation even be happening if it was a 280" bull???? Nope
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: blackveltbowhunter on May 21, 2016, 10:48:45 PM
 :sry: 257 I gotta disagree. I beleive your comparing apples to oranges. Personally i think this would still have created a big stir if it were a smaller bull. Maybe not as big but certainly caused a ruckus. The forum has blown up since the incidents you refer to. Which will lead to much greater exposure simply due to so many more folks seeing it in one spot.  I remember the kill em all story well. But those were low profile poachers. They were under the radar, trying not to get caught. Whether TR is innocent or guilty, if he actually believes this wouldn't be a high profile case he is either naive or a liar.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on May 21, 2016, 10:55:01 PM
The aforementioned group did waaaaay more to hunting, game populations than Tod ever dreamed of. Folks didn't become so emotional about it simply cause the $$$ wasn't there and 400" bulls weren't gettin smacked. That's facts, not apples or oranges....
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on May 21, 2016, 10:56:19 PM
Kiticasshunter, you clearly seem to know the tag holder so I have a question for you.  When it comes to this individuals hunting exploits is the size of the bull the end all?  Did he ever consider that shooting a bull that was darn near as tame as domestic livestock, well known, and oft photographed might generate  anemosity towards all hunters?  I'm very surprised he choose to burn that tag in this manner considering the opportunities that tag offered him.  Personally, I find little satisfaction in canned hunts but I recognize that not everyone is like me so I won't begrudge another hunter from enjoying the sport in any manner as long as it is legal and ethical.  As a sportsman, however, I always feel an obligation to do my best to represent hunters in a positive  light.  We, hunters, are often our own worst enemy.  When we waste game, make poor ethical decisions involving game, display kills in an undignified manner, hunt in an unsportsmanlike manner, etc we jeopardize the future of hunting.  I figure that roughly 10% of voters hunt.  Another 10% are against hunting so the future of hunting rests with the 80% of voters who don't have a dog in the fight.  I try to always consider how my actions may influence that 80% and do my best to make sure it is for the better.  Anyway, I'm just curious if any of this crossed his mind before he took that shot.  It is my prayer that all of us will do a better job of this in the future so that our grandkids will get to enjoy the same types of hunting experiences that we did.

I agree with everything you said. But I'm not going to tell a man in his 70's with health  issues what a real "hunt" is. As long as it's legal everyone can make thier own decisions on what they do.when a ranking official from the game department says it's ok,  most rational people would assume it is. This bull was shot in a more wild situation than the bull the teanawayslayer guy on this forum was involved in killing last season.  That situation would make most hunters furious.  But it was legal, so I can't say baiting in a front yard is wrong....,
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 21, 2016, 11:43:36 PM
257,

I recognized early on where this was headed. 

I posted my observations.  And... I was subject of personal attack just for posting facts that I considered irrefutable with regards to what had been said re: me being a liar, re: me being opposed to Raffle/Auction hunts, and much more importantly about me having a hard-on for Mr Reichert. 

From the very beginning I have said that in my opinion the best outcome would to admit "poor judgement" and for Mr Reichert to take his lumps. 

Again, what gave anyone the notion that killing this particular elk w/in GMU 334 would end well? 

From what others have told me re: the nature of the focus of the news media, beginning early this year: "Bullwinkle" was what they were focused on, and this was not something that was being discussed here.  But, I did try to "telegraph" to those defending Mr Reichert that irrespective of charges filed, yes/no, that what Mr Reichert should be focused on is that aspect.  Did I not?   

People who lined up behind Mr Reichert flat out stated: 
a) how does anybody know the bull was not w/in 334? 
b) that the 2015 Game Regs allowed this hunt to take place 
c) That if a & b above were not in Mr Reichert's favor - Morgan Grant gave explicit permission.   

I am familiar with the game regs and posted the controlling legal authority re: the restrictions on the tag and I posted a map showing the general location the animal was taken.  It is within GMU 334.  And I posted the pages out of the 2015 Game regs w/the GMU in question highlighted.

I did not say that Mr Grant never gave explicit permission, but I said I was skeptical that the conversation went down the way it has been portrayed. 

And I clearly stated:  Just by coincidence I had followed the 2007 incident closely.  Just out of curiosity, but that knowledge raised "red flags."  This isn't his first rodeo.  I do not know why after coming across the 2007 incident I followed it, but I do follow such things. 

Going back to the earlier epic thread I got into a discussion with others re: what I referred to as "usual suspects" and was able to give a fairly accurate account of an incident that took place in Mt Rainier National Park, I remembered who, what and basically where and when and then found published validation of my recollections of what went down in the legal arena and to the absolute best of my knowledge every thing else I stated is factual re: the Argo's reputation.  I don't know why these cases fascinate me, but the simple fact is they do.

Re; the 2007 incident, there were things I clearly stated were what I recall when I could not validate what I was posting.  But if what I posted was posted as fact, I provided documentation. 

And, on top of everything else, I have clearly stated that I do not see Mr Reichert as a "bad guy," I have posted that over and over again.  Have I not?  And when posting that I gave my reasoning for accepting that conclusion.  Did I not?

Clearly, in my mind poor judgement was exercised in this case.  I keep asking: what could give anyone the notion that this was going to end well?  It just simply was not going to end well in anyone's mind, or someone, anyone, would walk me and the rest of us through a scenario in which taking this elk within GMU 334 ends well. 

Irrespective of charges having been filed/not being filed by the time I got really involved in the discussion the "bullwinkle" story was being developed.   

I was "late to the game." I was not interviewed when the news people started poking around asking questions.  I have in my possession a hand written note that was taken off a phone line that only long time friends would use to call me.  The note asked me to return a call from a reporter.  You can do the math re: how did they get that phone number.  Out of the white pages maybe, but more likely than not someone I have known since before I had a cell phone gave them that number. 

Why did they want to talk to me?  I guess that it is because I have posted what I consider as reliable info.  Of course, if you are working on a story...  you do a Lexis Nexis search. 

OK now here is what information I provided: 

I live in Tacoma, but I keep my RV in central Washington, mostly Ellensburg for the better part of five months out of the year. 

I shoot chucks, and I saw a guy in Fred Meyer who had an alfalfa grower belt buckle on and pigeon holed him and that conversation developed into a friendship. 
 Through that friendship I developed friendships with people who have had conversations I was a part of about what went down and they had no reason to exaggerate. 

No, you have already told me you have talked to anyone I know who would know first hand. 

Yes, I understand that some residents are reluctant to "go on the record." 

No, he lives in Thorp, but his relatives live right at ground zero.  I really don't know if pursuing him would provide any first hand knowledge. 

No, this Todd Reichert is not a lawyer.  He owns a shake mill off Hwy 12.  I don't know him, but I know of him.  He has a great reputation in his community. 

No, I do not know the officer personally, I but I know his brother well and have only met Morgan Grant once (that is how I knew the "who" within WDFW).  But I do know of Morgan Grant's reputation re: grey areas.  I cannot help you out on the nature of the call.   

Yes, I know Rich Mann and yes, you are right, he is by the book.  Rich Mann is very familiar to me.  When I was younger "I met up with him in the field all the time and he is strictly by the book."  What is written in the Game Regs is what Rich Mann considers "the bible."  So if someone has said Rich Mann signed off... I am skeptical.

This topic was dormant on hunting-washington, Cboom basically called me out and then proceeded to attack my reputation in an effort to discredit me. 

I shared my thoughts re: where I could go re: shadow of the doubt and the potential repercussions of pursuing that strategy and was again personally attacked.

I have gone on record saying that I do not think Mr Reichert used good judgement and then provided an opinion on why I think that any "incompetent to read and understand the Game Regs strategy" would serve Mr Reichert well and have also pointed out where I consider various strategies flawed and are not IMHO opinion the best avenue to proceed down.



 

 

 

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: blackveltbowhunter on May 21, 2016, 11:55:15 PM
The aforementioned group did waaaaay more to hunting, game populations than Tod ever dreamed of. Folks didn't become so emotional about it simply cause the $$$ wasn't there and 400" bulls weren't gettin smacked. That's facts, not apples or oranges....

Not arguing who did more damage. If you think other hunters weren't PO'd then your wrong. I was extremely PO'd!!! I hunted alot of those areas and know it affected game populations. I know plenty of hunters who were furious, none were members here. Folks outside the hunting community didn't become as emotional cuz they couldn't see it. They didn't personally lose their pet deer. Or see it get shot.  Or if they did it was unbeknownst to them. When they cant put a "face" to it, it doesn't create as big of a reaction. I remember a legal hunt a few years ago up skagit way that attracted ALOT of media attention and it was not a "big bull" or "big money" hunt. The deparment shut it down if I remember correctly.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 22, 2016, 12:40:19 AM
The aforementioned group did waaaaay more to hunting, game populations than Tod ever dreamed of. Folks didn't become so emotional about it simply cause the $$$ wasn't there and 400" bulls weren't gettin smacked. That's facts, not apples or oranges....

Not arguing who did more damage. If you think other hunters weren't PO'd then your wrong. I was extremely PO'd!!! I hunted alot of those areas and know it affected game populations. I know plenty of hunters who were furious, none were members here. Folks outside the hunting community didn't become as emotional cuz they couldn't see it. They didn't personally lose their pet deer. Or see it get shot.  Or if they did it was unbeknownst to them. When they cant put a "face" to it, it doesn't create as big of a reaction. I remember a legal hunt a few years ago up skagit way that attracted ALOT of media attention and it was not a "big bull" or "big money" hunt. The deparment shut it down if I remember correctly.

I came to this topic having already formed an opinion:  Even if legal, it was a stupid thing to do.  How could anybody get the notion this would end well? 

I don't hunt east side elk so I looked at the 2015 Game Regs, and it doesn't look good from a defense standpoint. 

So then I hear, through the grapevine, that Mr Reichert in his initial contact with WDFW had said: It was "an oversight."  So OK, it was just simple negligence.   So "self report" and say you used poor judgement by not being 100% certain.  Take the same lumps that a guy who had a "shoot through" and killed a second elk and admitted a mistake would get.  Small fine and two years.  Life if you are a Mater Hunter though. 

But then it morphed into a very convoluted story of phone calls and *censored*, we know how to  minimize the damage.  And since I was familiar with the name I am saying "self report" poor judgement and take your lumps. 

But no.  We did nothing wrong.  Yea maybe legally, but:  How could anyone get the notion that killing this particular elk within GMU 334 could possibly end well?

But then when it becomes apparent that legalities are even being considered....  "self report" and gt a PR firm on board.  Pronto. 

Lay out a scenario in which this could end well.  Charges/no charges.  Please do. 

About the time I first commented here "Bullwinkle" was already on the table.  And guess what friends, locals were pissed. 

"Self report" and just accept an isolated instance of "poor judgement."   Do what politicians do in these circumstances, "self report" and get a PR firm on board and get in front of "the story."  Then take your lumps. 

Even if eventually found not guilty, remember there is no innocent finding, this killing of "Bullwinkle" was never going to end well.  Too many residents of ground zero were thoroughly pissed about it. 

The story had been being developed before I posted a message that "telegraphed" that "Bullwinkle" was going to be the headline. 

Without a "lethal removal" order from WDFW, Bullwinkle was just hanging out in GMU 334 and would show up  for his apple soon. 

For the love of God man - what could ever give anyone the notion that this was going to end well? 

   
Title: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: klickman on May 22, 2016, 11:53:11 AM
Kiticasshunter, you clearly seem to know the tag holder so I have a question for you.  When it comes to this individuals hunting exploits is the size of the bull the end all?  Did he ever consider that shooting a bull that was darn near as tame as domestic livestock, well known, and oft photographed might generate  anemosity towards all hunters?  I'm very surprised he choose to burn that tag in this manner considering the opportunities that tag offered him.  Personally, I find little satisfaction in canned hunts but I recognize that not everyone is like me so I won't begrudge another hunter from enjoying the sport in any manner as long as it is legal and ethical.  As a sportsman, however, I always feel an obligation to do my best to represent hunters in a positive  light.  We, hunters, are often our own worst enemy.  When we waste game, make poor ethical decisions involving game, display kills in an undignified manner, hunt in an unsportsmanlike manner, etc we jeopardize the future of hunting.  I figure that roughly 10% of voters hunt.  Another 10% are against hunting so the future of hunting rests with the 80% of voters who don't have a dog in the fight.  I try to always consider how my actions may influence that 80% and do my best to make sure it is for the better.  Anyway, I'm just curious if any of this crossed his mind before he took that shot.  It is my prayer that all of us will do a better job of this in the future so that our grandkids will get to enjoy the same types of hunting experiences that we did.

I agree with everything you said. But I'm not going to tell a man in his 70's with health  issues what a real "hunt" is. As long as it's legal everyone can make thier own decisions on what they do.when a ranking official from the game department says it's ok,  most rational people would assume it is. This bull was shot in a more wild situation than the bull the teanawayslayer guy on this forum was involved in killing last season.  That situation would make most hunters furious.  But it was legal, so I can't say baiting in a front yard is wrong....,

Why do you, cboom, and --- ---
Keep throwing out the hunt Tanawayslayer was on?  There's no comparison. You are making false statements.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: BAR C3 on May 22, 2016, 01:09:21 PM
Can someone point me to the RCW or WDFW enacting legislation that grants WDFW enforcement officers the authority to suspend, temporarily or situationally, the issued regulations of the department?

Oh, and is there anything but a "he said" that mr Grant gave his permission verbally? Anything that documents his action? Recording? Text? Email? 

Assuming this permission could be documented, it seems to me it would only be evidence that the Sgt and the hunter should both be prosecuted, rather than a basis that the hunter is without fault. If a police officer gives me "permission" to steal a car, I'm pretty sure I'm still going to jail if another officer arrests me for it.  Primarily because I don't hear anyone claiming that the legality was in question, only whether or not they tried to get someone to give them extrajudicial Okee Dokee.

Feel free to correct me if that's wrong. But I have seen nothing that suggests that anyone misunderstood the unit the game was in or if it had any branch antlered season that would make it open to the tag holder.  I'd have a slightly different opinion if someone was making a reasonable claim that the unit location was unclear or that a reg was ambiguous and they needed WDFW to clear it up, haven't seen that.
If the game warden gave permission via any of the above in the authority of his position, it's all subject to public disclosure. Any Joe blow can ask for it. Won't be long and the media will be. This is going to upset the bunny huggers after being in multiple news sources today.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: M_ray on May 22, 2016, 02:07:07 PM
Kiticasshunter, you clearly seem to know the tag holder so I have a question for you.  When it comes to this individuals hunting exploits is the size of the bull the end all?  Did he ever consider that shooting a bull that was darn near as tame as domestic livestock, well known, and oft photographed might generate  anemosity towards all hunters?  I'm very surprised he choose to burn that tag in this manner considering the opportunities that tag offered him.  Personally, I find little satisfaction in canned hunts but I recognize that not everyone is like me so I won't begrudge another hunter from enjoying the sport in any manner as long as it is legal and ethical.  As a sportsman, however, I always feel an obligation to do my best to represent hunters in a positive  light.  We, hunters, are often our own worst enemy.  When we waste game, make poor ethical decisions involving game, display kills in an undignified manner, hunt in an unsportsmanlike manner, etc we jeopardize the future of hunting.  I figure that roughly 10% of voters hunt.  Another 10% are against hunting so the future of hunting rests with the 80% of voters who don't have a dog in the fight.  I try to always consider how my actions may influence that 80% and do my best to make sure it is for the better.  Anyway, I'm just curious if any of this crossed his mind before he took that shot.  It is my prayer that all of us will do a better job of this in the future so that our grandkids will get to enjoy the same types of hunting experiences that we did.

I agree with everything you said. But I'm not going to tell a man in his 70's with health  issues what a real "hunt" is. As long as it's legal everyone can make thier own decisions on what they do.when a ranking official from the game department says it's ok,  most rational people would assume it is. This bull was shot in a more wild situation than the bull the teanawayslayer guy on this forum was involved in killing last season.  That situation would make most hunters furious.  But it was legal, so I can't say baiting in a front yard is wrong....,

Why do you, cboom, and -
Keep throwing out the hunt Tanawayslayer was on?  There's  no comparison. You are making false statements.

A select few that are friends of the hunter or were party to the hunt making a poor attempt to muddy the waters.  It shows the mentality we're dealing with that can't tell the difference between a legal hunt and illegal poaching. Even while their friend is being charged and investigated they are if nothing else loyal and willing to go down with the ship!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 22, 2016, 02:56:19 PM
Kiticasshunter, you clearly seem to know the tag holder so I have a question for you.  When it comes to this individuals hunting exploits is the size of the bull the end all?  Did he ever consider that shooting a bull that was darn near as tame as domestic livestock, well known, and oft photographed might generate  anemosity towards all hunters?  I'm very surprised he choose to burn that tag in this manner considering the opportunities that tag offered him.  Personally, I find little satisfaction in canned hunts but I recognize that not everyone is like me so I won't begrudge another hunter from enjoying the sport in any manner as long as it is legal and ethical.  As a sportsman, however, I always feel an obligation to do my best to represent hunters in a positive  light.  We, hunters, are often our own worst enemy.  When we waste game, make poor ethical decisions involving game, display kills in an undignified manner, hunt in an unsportsmanlike manner, etc we jeopardize the future of hunting.  I figure that roughly 10% of voters hunt.  Another 10% are against hunting so the future of hunting rests with the 80% of voters who don't have a dog in the fight.  I try to always consider how my actions may influence that 80% and do my best to make sure it is for the better.  Anyway, I'm just curious if any of this crossed his mind before he took that shot.  It is my prayer that all of us will do a better job of this in the future so that our grandkids will get to enjoy the same types of hunting experiences that we did.

I agree with everything you said. But I'm not going to tell a man in his 70's with health  issues what a real "hunt" is. As long as it's legal everyone can make thier own decisions on what they do.when a ranking official from the game department says it's ok,  most rational people would assume it is. This bull was shot in a more wild situation than the bull the teanawayslayer guy on this forum was involved in killing last season.  That situation would make most hunters furious.  But it was legal, so I can't say baiting in a front yard is wrong....,

Why do you, cboom, and -
Keep throwing out the hunt Tanawayslayer was on?  There's no comparison. You are making false statements.

If "Bulwinkle" had wandered up into Shnebley Canyon no one here would have a problem with him getting shot. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Kazekurt on May 22, 2016, 04:03:11 PM
I know it would be impossible to enforce but in IMHO certain animals should be off limits.  The Nosler buck in Bend Oregon is a great example.  He more or less lived in the city, was  photographed by literally hundreds  of people over a  prolonged period of time , and become sort of a pet and source of pride to that community.  That buck was  ridiculous, far superior to anything I have ever killed, but I would not have shot that buck even if I legally could have.   If I didn't know his backstory, and he  crossed paths with me in a legal area  I would absolutely have shot him, but  I would never have done it  if I was aware of his notoriety before the encounter.   Certain animals sort of become "local treasures;" especially if they dwell  primarily in urban areas and killing one of those animals can unleash a boatload of problems on the hunting community.   I value my right to hunt, more than I value any particular animal so I wouldn't want to  jeopardize that even for the grandest of trophies.   Bullwinkle may  not yet have reached this type of status but he certainly was close. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: popeshawnpaul on May 22, 2016, 04:13:52 PM
IF Sgt. Grant did get or give the ok, I'm sure this will lead to others "making a call" and doing what they want.

PopeSHawn
If TR gets off because of this "call" will case law precedent be set or will it just be a first instance and it needs more actual cases to be hard and fast??

if so you can bet it will be happening more often!!

It actually happens all the time.  I have two recent cases where it happened.  Before this case I informed the GMAC and new Chief Crown this was happening, especially with the licensing division.  I advised he had a problem with employees giving bad legal advise.  I didn't feel they took my concerns seriously. 

Think of difficult to understand WAC's and RCW's that conflict with one another.  Everyone on this forum seems to think the regulations are easy to understand and who wouldn't know the law?  Well, the regulations are long and complicated and I know if a few instances where the regs, WAC, and RCW conflict.  What would be the prudent thing to do before you buy a license if you are unsure of the law?  Email or call WDFW.  Everyone that thinks this is a good ploy to go poach animals after getting faulty advise speak of relative nonsense.  I can't see someone that wants to do something illegal doing this.  The call is difficult to ascertain what was said.  If I were to give advise on the situation, I advise clients to email WDFW or get it in writing.  While it might still not be a defense, it's great stuff to have.  If they give you bad advice, is the burden on you?  Depends on the charge and whether intent is an issue.  It will not create case law because it has happened many times and there is no legal issue to appeal that a court could look to overturn. 

This is akin to a DUI case I had about a decade ago.  The trooper came upon my client on the side of the road.  He advised him to drive up to the nearest gas station about a mile away and followed him there.  He then arrested him for DUI.  Why would he advise my client to violate the law and drive drunk and then cite for DUI?  I lost that case but still think it's BS.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: M_ray on May 22, 2016, 06:07:39 PM
IF Sgt. Grant did get or give the ok, I'm sure this will lead to others "making a call" and doing what they want.

PopeSHawn
If TR gets off because of this "call" will case law precedent be set or will it just be a first instance and it needs more actual cases to be hard and fast??

if so you can bet it will be happening more often!!

It actually happens all the time.  I have two recent cases where it happened.  Before this case I informed the GMAC and new Chief Crown this was happening, especially with the licensing division.  I advised he had a problem with employees giving bad legal advise.  I didn't feel they took my concerns seriously. 

Think of difficult to understand WAC's and RCW's that conflict with one another.  Everyone on this forum seems to think the regulations are easy to understand and who wouldn't know the law?  Well, the regulations are long and complicated and I know if a few instances where the regs, WAC, and RCW conflict.  What would be the prudent thing to do before you buy a license if you are unsure of the law?  Email or call WDFW.  Everyone that thinks this is a good ploy to go poach animals after getting faulty advise speak of relative nonsense.  I can't see someone that wants to do something illegal doing this.  The call is difficult to ascertain what was said.  If I were to give advise on the situation, I advise clients to email WDFW or get it in writing.  While it might still not be a defense, it's great stuff to have.  If they give you bad advice, is the burden on you?  Depends on the charge and whether intent is an issue.  It will not create case law because it has happened many times and there is no legal issue to appeal that a court could look to overturn. 

This is akin to a DUI case I had about a decade ago.  The trooper came upon my client on the side of the road.  He advised him to drive up to the nearest gas station about a mile away and followed him there.  He then arrested him for DUI.  Why would he advise my client to violate the law and drive drunk and then cite for DUI?  I lost that case but still think it's BS.

That sounds great Shawn if the party involved didn't know where they were at? I would believe your argument if it were two guys from out of state that didn't know where they were at but these guys didn't just stumble upon some bulls in a field by chance. The fellas helping TR grew up in the valley and there wasn't a day out of 365 before this bull was shot that you couldn't come around the corner and see 5-10 cars stopped and a dozen people taking pics of these 5 bulls posing, eating apples out of their hands and the day in question there was a crowd gathering too, all well below the canal I might add.
This part of the area description is not hard to understand even for those who are not from Kittitas. So for some guys that have spent their whole lives there and another who has a boat load of experience buying Auction and Gov tags this is a very lame excuse given the high profile of these animals. They knew exactly where they were and the magnitude of the situation before them, they just wanted to kill that bull at any cost.

I believe a call was made ... but honestly? 
Was the question...
 "can I kill this bull in 334?" 
or
"can I use a rifle in 334?"

BTW given the experience of all involved they shouldn't have had to make a call in the first place cause they know the answer to these questions 

Not in a million years are you going to convince me that they didn't know where they were at AND that they needed to make a call to ask permission!!! 

 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: popeshawnpaul on May 23, 2016, 07:33:14 AM
IF Sgt. Grant did get or give the ok, I'm sure this will lead to others "making a call" and doing what they want.

PopeSHawn
If TR gets off because of this "call" will case law precedent be set or will it just be a first instance and it needs more actual cases to be hard and fast??

if so you can bet it will be happening more often!!

It actually happens all the time.  I have two recent cases where it happened.  Before this case I informed the GMAC and new Chief Crown this was happening, especially with the licensing division.  I advised he had a problem with employees giving bad legal advise.  I didn't feel they took my concerns seriously. 

Think of difficult to understand WAC's and RCW's that conflict with one another.  Everyone on this forum seems to think the regulations are easy to understand and who wouldn't know the law?  Well, the regulations are long and complicated and I know if a few instances where the regs, WAC, and RCW conflict.  What would be the prudent thing to do before you buy a license if you are unsure of the law?  Email or call WDFW.  Everyone that thinks this is a good ploy to go poach animals after getting faulty advise speak of relative nonsense.  I can't see someone that wants to do something illegal doing this.  The call is difficult to ascertain what was said.  If I were to give advise on the situation, I advise clients to email WDFW or get it in writing.  While it might still not be a defense, it's great stuff to have.  If they give you bad advice, is the burden on you?  Depends on the charge and whether intent is an issue.  It will not create case law because it has happened many times and there is no legal issue to appeal that a court could look to overturn. 

This is akin to a DUI case I had about a decade ago.  The trooper came upon my client on the side of the road.  He advised him to drive up to the nearest gas station about a mile away and followed him there.  He then arrested him for DUI.  Why would he advise my client to violate the law and drive drunk and then cite for DUI?  I lost that case but still think it's BS.

That sounds great Shawn if the party involved didn't know where they were at? I would believe your argument if

I never made an argument on anyone's behalf.  I just stated the game regs are very convoluted in many instances but I didn't cite the one relevant in this case.

The only thing I "tried to convince" you of is the regs in many instances are convoluted and the WDFW does and will give bad advise if requested from time to time. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 2MANY on May 23, 2016, 07:34:12 AM
"I know it would be impossible to enforce but in IMHO certain animals should be off limits.  The Nosler buck in Bend Oregon is a great example.  He more or less lived in the city, was  photographed by literally hundreds  of people over a  prolonged period of time , and become sort of a pet and source of pride to that community.  That buck was  ridiculous, far superior to anything I have ever killed, but I would not have shot that buck even if I legally could have.   If I didn't know his backstory, and he  crossed paths with me in a legal area  I would absolutely have shot him, but  I would never have done it  if I was aware of his notoriety before the encounter.   Certain animals sort of become "local treasures;" especially if they dwell  primarily in urban areas and killing one of those animals can unleash a boatload of problems on the hunting community.   I value my right to hunt, more than I value any particular animal so I wouldn't want to  jeopardize that even for the grandest of trophies.   Bullwinkle may  not yet have reached this type of status but he certainly was close."


Very well said and I agree 100%.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on May 23, 2016, 07:53:25 AM
With Pope's warnings and now this case I think they need to follow up with a policy that states only certain employment positions are authorized to give information to the public. So in the future Joe schmo employee has to refer anybody calling in to another person with more knowledge of the regs.

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Odell on May 23, 2016, 08:28:19 AM
The unit is closed to branch bull hunting.

It is the individuals responsibility to know the law.

Those are facts.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 2MANY on May 23, 2016, 08:55:22 AM
State agencies are full of people that couldn't make it on the private side.
They suckle the government's tut until retirement and are protected by the government's inability to fire them.
Obviously they screwed up when they were called and asked a question.
Ask em where the break room is located and you will get a correct answer.
Ask them a hunting or fishing question and they will transfer you to a guy's answering machine.
When he, she, or it gets back from a sick leave day spent fishing the Cowlitz he, she, or it just might call you back even.

The entire agency should be sub contracted out so there could be some level of financial accountability. .
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Magnum_Willys on May 23, 2016, 09:00:50 AM
The unit is closed to branch bull hunting.

It is the individuals responsibility to know the law.

Those are facts.

These facts are undisputed
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 2MANY on May 23, 2016, 09:02:41 AM
Everybody cut Footloose.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Coastal_native on May 23, 2016, 10:56:20 AM
This might be a more appropriate screen grab from that movie.  I've lost interest in the truth, at this point.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on May 23, 2016, 11:55:41 AM
What a mess.  :bash:

If they would have just gone after a different bull.

In the end the only people that are going to be happy are the lawyers.  What a shame.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Odell on May 23, 2016, 12:36:41 PM
What a mess.  :bash:

If they would have just gone after a different bull.

In the end the only people that are going to be happy are the lawyers.  What a shame.

No kidding. If it was legal I would shoot a buck or bull in an alfalfa field any day of the week. But with that tag, the whole point is the opportunity it gives you. Go chase one!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 2MANY on May 23, 2016, 12:45:32 PM
I thought I previously read he is by definition a handicapped hunter???

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on May 23, 2016, 12:51:37 PM
What a mess.  :bash:

If they would have just gone after a different bull.

In the end the only people that are going to be happy are the lawyers.  What a shame.

No kidding. If it was legal I would shoot a buck or bull in an alfalfa field any day of the week. But with that tag, the whole point is the opportunity it gives you. Go chase one!
I would do the same with or without the tag.  If it would have been in an alfalfa field that was normally open I would have probably done the same as him.  People would have been upset still but it would have been within the rules.  Those people could then change the rules if they didn't like them.

This hunt seems to have gone down the opposite way, change the rules to make the hunt legal and that doesn't sit well with people.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: HntnFsh on May 23, 2016, 01:21:31 PM
I thought I previously read he is by definition a handicapped hunter???

If so it would have no bearing on this case.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 2MANY on May 23, 2016, 02:24:36 PM
Lots of things seem to have no bearing in this case or the thread.

I only brought it up because it may have had bearing on him just going and chasing one like the previous poster implied he could do.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Russ McDonald on May 23, 2016, 05:02:22 PM
A friendly reminder please no profanity or intended profanity that includes trying to get around the censor by abbreviating, hyphenating, or substituting letters and numbers.  Thanks
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: REHJWA on May 23, 2016, 05:10:59 PM
If he was so set on this bull you would think he could have gotten a landowner damage permit???
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: HntnFsh on May 23, 2016, 05:18:47 PM
If he was so set on this bull you would think he could have gotten a landowner damage permit???

I doubt it.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Woodchuck on May 23, 2016, 05:29:12 PM
If he was so set on this bull you would think he could have gotten a landowner damage permit???
Not likely for a bull.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on May 23, 2016, 05:42:56 PM
If he was so set on this bull you would think he could have gotten a landowner damage permit???
Not in a GMU closed to the hunting of branch antlered bulls.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on May 23, 2016, 06:20:38 PM
If he was so set on this bull you would think he could have gotten a landowner damage permit???
Not in a GMU closed to the hunting of branch antlered bulls.


Wait.....   Was this bull killed in a GMU that's closed to the hunting of branch antlered bulls?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on May 23, 2016, 06:27:50 PM
If he was so set on this bull you would think he could have gotten a landowner damage permit???
Not in a GMU closed to the hunting of branch antlered bulls.


Wait.....   Was this bull killed in a GMU that's closed to the hunting of branch antlered bulls?

Yes.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: DaveMonti on May 23, 2016, 06:56:21 PM

Wait.....   Was this bull killed in a GMU that's closed to the hunting of branch antlered bulls?

WHAT????  Now that changes EVERYTHING...
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Odell on May 23, 2016, 07:12:27 PM
Lots of things seem to have no bearing in this case or the thread.

I only brought it up because it may have had bearing on him just going and chasing one like the previous poster implied he could do.

The guy hunts multiple states and killed a bull in the blues. He could chase one from a quad where legal, from horseback if able. I'm not saying he has to hump down a canyon and carry an elk out on his back but you would think with that tag you want to go after a bull that's at least off the highway. He's killed so many mashers I can't see what the purpose of killing this one was.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Coastal_native on May 23, 2016, 07:34:47 PM
Lots of things seem to have no bearing in this case or the thread.

I only brought it up because it may have had bearing on him just going and chasing one like the previous poster implied he could do.

He's killed so many mashers I can't see what the purpose of killing this one was.

More is better?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: h20hunter on May 23, 2016, 07:36:13 PM
If he was so set on this bull you would think he could have gotten a landowner damage permit???
Not in a GMU closed to the hunting of branch antlered bulls.


Wait.....   Was this bull killed in a GMU that's closed to the hunting of branch antlered bulls?

Best post on this topic I've read in a long time.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 23, 2016, 07:41:42 PM
Lots of things seem to have no bearing in this case or the thread.

I only brought it up because it may have had bearing on him just going and chasing one like the previous poster implied he could do.

The guy hunts multiple states and killed a bull in the blues. He could chase one from a quad where legal, from horseback if able. I'm not saying he has to hump down a canyon and carry an elk out on his back but you would think with that tag you want to go after a bull that's at least off the highway. He's killed so many mashers I can't see what the purpose of killing this one was.


He could be suffering from Obsessive Compulsive Disorder.

It may well be that he just goes coo coo for coco puffs and simply is unable to control himself with an elk tag and a rifle in his hands.
   
 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on May 23, 2016, 08:10:10 PM

Wait.....   Was this bull killed in a GMU that's closed to the hunting of branch antlered bulls?

WHAT????  Now that changes EVERYTHING...
I hadn't stopped laughing from Dan-O's post when I got your yours.

You guys are a deadly one two punch.  Thanks for bringing some humor to this train wreck.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Alchase on May 24, 2016, 09:35:36 AM

Wait.....   Was this bull killed in a GMU that's closed to the hunting of branch antlered bulls?

WHAT????  Now that changes EVERYTHING...
I hadn't stopped laughing from Dan-O's post when I got your yours.

You guys are a deadly one two punch.  Thanks for bringing some humor to this train wreck.

I think they were serious........... :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on May 24, 2016, 04:05:51 PM
If he was so set on this bull you would think he could have gotten a landowner damage permit???
Not in a GMU closed to the hunting of branch antlered bulls.


Wait.....   Was this bull killed in a GMU that's closed to the hunting of branch antlered bulls?

Yes.

Its a perspective thing. What's illegal to one is legal to another. :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on May 24, 2016, 04:07:30 PM

Wait.....   Was this bull killed in a GMU that's closed to the hunting of branch antlered bulls?

WHAT????  Now that changes EVERYTHING...
I hadn't stopped laughing from Dan-O's post when I got your yours.

You guys are a deadly one two punch.  Thanks for bringing some humor to this train wreck.

I think they were serious........... :chuckle:

Of course he is, he's a member of the YAKASESSFGG...or whatever we call ourselves these days >:(
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on May 24, 2016, 06:39:42 PM

Wait.....   Was this bull killed in a GMU that's closed to the hunting of branch antlered bulls?

WHAT????  Now that changes EVERYTHING...
I hadn't stopped laughing from Dan-O's post when I got your yours.

You guys are a deadly one two punch.  Thanks for bringing some humor to this train wreck.

I think they were serious........... :chuckle:

Of course he is, he's a member of the YAKASESSFGG...or whatever we call ourselves these days >:(

 :yeah: :yeah: >:( >:( >:( >:(
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: dscubame on May 24, 2016, 08:39:14 PM
What ever did happen to the YAR good ole boys clan?  Did it go Secret Society?  Underground only to be spoke of in myth and legend?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: DaveMonti on May 24, 2016, 09:47:44 PM
It went the way of the recurve compound bow.  Disappeared altogether.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on May 24, 2016, 09:56:11 PM

Wait.....   Was this bull killed in a GMU that's closed to the hunting of branch antlered bulls?

WHAT????  Now that changes EVERYTHING...
I hadn't stopped laughing from Dan-O's post when I got your yours.

You guys are a deadly one two punch.  Thanks for bringing some humor to this train wreck.

I think they were serious........... :chuckle:

Of course he is, he's a member of the YAKASESSFGG...or whatever we call ourselves these days >:(

 :yeah: :yeah: >:( >:( >:( >:(


Well then...... are we sure it was really a branch antlered bull?   
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 2MANY on May 25, 2016, 07:22:34 AM
It's not his fault the elk died.

Guns kill elk not people.

If guns were outlawed this elk would still be making a living off the rancher's alfalfa and tearing down the their fences.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: smittyJ on May 25, 2016, 07:40:59 AM

Wait.....   Was this bull killed in a GMU that's closed to the hunting of branch antlered bulls?

It "identified" as a True Spike!

WHAT????  Now that changes EVERYTHING...
I hadn't stopped laughing from Dan-O's post when I got your yours.

You guys are a deadly one two punch.  Thanks for bringing some humor to this train wreck.

I think they were serious........... :chuckle:

Of course he is, he's a member of the YAKASESSFGG...or whatever we call ourselves these days >:(

 :yeah: :yeah: >:( >:( >:( >:(


Well then...... are we sure it was really a branch antlered bull?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on May 25, 2016, 07:51:05 AM
It went the way of the recurve compound bow.  Disappeared altogether.

The YAR...I will neither confirm nor deny the existence of such an organization. Thank you that will be all, no questions (stepping off my podium). 8)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on May 25, 2016, 07:52:39 AM

Wait.....   Was this bull killed in a GMU that's closed to the hunting of branch antlered bulls?

WHAT????  Now that changes EVERYTHING...
I hadn't stopped laughing from Dan-O's post when I got your yours.

You guys are a deadly one two punch.  Thanks for bringing some humor to this train wreck.

I think they were serious........... :chuckle:

Of course he is, he's a member of the YAKASESSFGG...or whatever we call ourselves these days >:(

 :yeah: :yeah: >:( >:( >:( >:(


Well then...... are we sure it was really a branch antlered bull?

It was a world record spike that self - identified as a branched bull, therefore legal.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on May 25, 2016, 07:55:41 AM
 :o disappeared as I went to quote...must've been that super - secret - black organization - that doesn't exist-3 letter agency....... :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on May 25, 2016, 07:55:56 AM
One last time, then this thread will go the way of the compound recurve bow. It'll disappear all together. This is the last warning regarding this subject.


Posting the personal information of other members is not allowed.  Don't do it. You'll get banned. It will get nuked.
Don't post insults or personal attacks.
Don't post innacurate information. Anything that is not a true statement regarding the topic of this thread and/or anything directly related to it will get nuked.



Posting the personal information of other members is not allowed. Don't do it. You'll get banned
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on May 25, 2016, 08:09:54 AM
As I was going to add, I don't think he cared. I'm not sticking up for or defending him, just stating what I believe to be the honest truth. He knew there might be some controversy and just didn't care.

Also, I think someone confirmed on here that the 2007 incident resulted in a conviction for lying and not any game related convictions so this in a sense would be his 1st offense, if it holds up.

He's obviously got some extra money to spend and I don't think he really cares what people so why do people insist on continuing to state he should care or do something to show remorse or give back if he really cared...that's just wishful thinking.

He's a self - made type of man and if he didn't care in the past what's left to expect a change now?

I'm sure if the alleged approved authorization from wdfw pans out he's not going to care and go out and find some more monsters. If not, I'm sure he's going to drag this out as long as he can, possibly another couple of years just to continue buying up the exclusive tags he's used to and not bat an eye.

Like I said, face some reality and get over the idea he's going to do something to feel good for everybody else.

I'm not defending or supporting him, just stating the obvious.  It's just crazy watching this train wreck continue as it doesn't matter what we say or think, it matters what actually happens in court and he's convicted of. :dunno:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: h20hunter on May 25, 2016, 08:17:34 AM
Good points Plat. I think you are correct that he simply may not give a hoot. IF he did get permission,  right or wrong, this whole mess will simply go away and left to be argued on Internet forums.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on May 25, 2016, 08:21:12 AM
Dare I ask.......

What if he did make the calls and get the permission from WDFW to shoot this bull? Who would be the bad guy at that point? This has been burning in the back of my head since the beginning of this hot mess.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Woodchuck on May 25, 2016, 08:24:11 AM
 :yeah:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on May 25, 2016, 08:36:53 AM
Dare I ask.......

What if he did make the calls and get the permission from WDFW to shoot this bull? Who would be the bad guy at that point? This has been burning in the back of my head since the beginning of this hot mess.

As the incident occurred I heard from 2 people in the know and so far one of those people's story is starting to take shape and reveal itself to be accurate.

Right or wrong ethically doesn't matter in this incident. Legal vs illegal and what a jury or judge thinks is what's going to matter. If permission was given and the person(s) that gave that permission stick to their words then whether it was actually legal by the WAC or RCW isn't going to matter because the judge/jury are going to be swayed by the official (s) that authorized it.

Pope's posted already that it doesn't matter if they had the authority by law or not, with the officer telling an inebriated person to drive further down the road. Pope clearly stated he pushed that issue and it didn't work out for his client. The officer didn't have the authority per WAC/RCW to make that call but he did.

We get it, or at least I do, they don't have the authority by law but If it turns out authority was given then he's walking.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Ghost Hunter on May 25, 2016, 08:44:12 AM
Dare I ask.......

What if he did make the calls and get the permission from WDFW to shoot this bull? Who would be the bad guy at that point? This has been burning in the back of my head since the beginning of this hot mess.

We get it, or at least I do, they don't have the authority by law but If it turns out authority was given then he's walking.

He walks WDFW might need an unlisted information phone number :dunno: :rolleyes:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bearpaw on May 25, 2016, 09:48:20 AM
This applies to several members on both sides of these Reichert topics, you will know in what manner this message applies to you.

Please keep your facts straight and follow the forum rules. H-W is an internet service provider, members publish topics that they wish to discuss and other members publish comments regarding their own thoughts on various topics. Courts have ruled that publishers (members) on internet service providers are responsible for their own comments. Hunting-Washington forum (which I own) attempts to allow as open family-friendly discussion as possible and has a neutral position on the Reichert issue. I don't know what the facts of the case are but I have made several statements in numerous Reichert topics asking members to only post factual information on this issue, yet we have had to remove numerous individual comments and even whole topics about this issue that are obviously speculative and potentially untruthful or slanderous, or that contain names or personal info about members, or due to name calling (all of which is not allowed).

In return for trying to be fair to all sides I have been threatened with law suits or criticized from both sides. A few members who continue to ignore the forum rules and or post unsubstantiated info are about one step away from being banned from this forum as myself and several other moderators are tired of trying babysit certain members posting in these topics. If you wish to remain on this forum please follow the rules and don't post unproven accusations that are false or defamatory, or personal information, or you will be banned from this forum. Please read the forum rules again, read the underlined portion twice:

http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,163263.0.html

Quote
Forum Rules & Policies
This forum is intended to be a family friendly and helpful venue for hunters, fishers, trappers, and other sportsmen. Unauthorized advertising is not allowed, contact forum management for available advertising opportunities. Forum management reserves the right to remove any member who violates the forum rules/policies or who in their opinion is actively working against the common interests of hunters or other sportsmen. This is a privately owned site with the following rules and policies:

You agree, through your use of this forum, that you will not post any material which is false, defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, name calling, belittling, threatening, negativity in success topics, unproven accusations, obscene, profanity or intended profanity, sexually oriented, adult material, invasive of a person's privacy, or in violation of any International, State, or United States Federal law. You also agree not to post any copyrighted material unless you own the copyright or you have written consent from the owner of the copyrighted material. You further agree that you are granting Hunting-Washington perpetual unrestricted use of your material. Spam, flooding, unauthorized advertising, chain letters, pyramid schemes, and solicitations are not allowed on this forum.

Note that it is impossible for the staff or the owners of this forum to confirm the validity of material. Please remember that we do not actively monitor all posted material, and as such, are not responsible for the content contained within. We do not warrant the accuracy, authenticity, completeness, or usefulness of any information presented. The posted material expresses the views of the author, and not necessarily the views of this forum, its staff, its subsidiaries, or this forum's owner. Anyone who feels that posted material or a private message is objectionable is encouraged to notify an administrator or moderator of this forum immediately. The staff and the owner of this forum reserve the right to edit or remove any content, if they determine that removal is needed it is a manual process so removal or editing may not occur immediately. This policy applies to member profile information as well.

You remain solely responsible for the content that you post. Furthermore, you agree to indemnify and hold harmless the owners of this forum, any related websites to this forum, its staff, and its subsidiaries. The owners of this forum reserve the right to reveal your identity (or any other related information collected on this service) in the event of a formal complaint, legal, or lawful action arising from your use of this forum.

You have the ability, as you register, to choose a username under which you may post your material, only appropriate usernames will be allowed. You may only have one username and any change to your username requires preapproval by an administrator. With this user account you are about to register, you agree to never give your password out to another person except an administrator, for your protection and for validity reasons. You also agree to NEVER use another person's account for any reason.  We also HIGHLY recommend you use a complex and unique password for your account, to prevent account theft.

After you register and login to this forum, you will be able to fill out a detailed profile and post content on the forum. It is your responsibility to present acceptable information and material. Your IP address is recorded and may be used in the event that you need to be banned from this forum or your ISP contacted due to a major violation of this agreement.

Also note that the software places a cookie, a text file containing bits of information (such as your username and password), in your browser's cache. This is ONLY used to keep you logged in/out. The software does not collect or send any other form of information to your computer.

All forum rules and policies are subject to administrative discretion and may be changed without notice at any time.

Thank You,
Forum Management Team
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on May 25, 2016, 10:06:36 AM

Also, I think someone confirmed on here that the 2007 incident resulted in a conviction for lying and not any game related convictions so this in a sense would be his 1st offense, if it holds up.

 As a result of a plea, any good attorney will get his client a lesser charge in the end, than the one they are originally facing.

 Don't think for a second a judge does not have all the facts/history in front of them while hearing a case. :twocents:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on May 25, 2016, 10:31:51 AM
Dare I ask.......

What if he did make the calls and get the permission from WDFW to shoot this bull? Who would be the bad guy at that point? This has been burning in the back of my head since the beginning of this hot mess.

As the incident occurred I heard from 2 people in the know and so far one of those people's story is starting to take shape and reveal itself to be accurate.

Right or wrong ethically doesn't matter in this incident. Legal vs illegal and what a jury or judge thinks is what's going to matter. If permission was given and the person(s) that gave that permission stick to their words then whether it was actually legal by the WAC or RCW isn't going to matter because the judge/jury are going to be swayed by the official (s) that authorized it.

Pope's posted already that it doesn't matter if they had the authority by law or not, with the officer telling an inebriated person to drive further down the road. Pope clearly stated he pushed that issue and it didn't work out for his client. The officer didn't have the authority per WAC/RCW to make that call but he did.

We get it, or at least I do, they don't have the authority by law but If it turns out authority was given then he's walking.



Easy now platt, common sense will getcha flamed!!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on May 25, 2016, 10:42:07 AM
Dare I ask.......

What if he did make the calls and get the permission from WDFW to shoot this bull? Who would be the bad guy at that point? This has been burning in the back of my head since the beginning of this hot mess.

We get it, or at least I do, they don't have the authority by law but If it turns out authority was given then he's walking.

He walks WDFW might need an unlisted information phone number :dunno: :rolleyes:
Great question, reply and comment. All three of you nailed it.

If that is what happened focus of anger over this incident will shift to the WDFW.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on May 25, 2016, 10:53:39 AM
Dare I ask.......

What if he did make the calls and get the permission from WDFW to shoot this bull? Who would be the bad guy at that point? This has been burning in the back of my head since the beginning of this hot mess.

We get it, or at least I do, they don't have the authority by law but If it turns out authority was given then he's walking.

He walks WDFW might need an unlisted information phone number :dunno: :rolleyes:
Great question, reply and comment. All three of you nailed it.

If that is what happened focus of anger over this incident will shift to the WDFW.

My prediction if this goes down. You'll still have the crowd who remains pissed off at Mr. Reichert for even calling for permission in the first place.
(stand by. I'm putting on my flame retardant suit)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on May 25, 2016, 12:07:53 PM

Also, I think someone confirmed on here that the 2007 incident resulted in a conviction for lying and not any game related convictions so this in a sense would be his 1st offense, if it holds up.

 As a result of a plee, any good attorney will get his client a lesser charge in the end, than the one they are originally facing.

 Don't think for a second a judge does not have all the facts/history in front of them while hearing a case. :twocents:

I know, I've been on the side of the enforcement side of the law for quite awhile. It doesn't matter, seriously, as I've witnessed 1st hand in tribal, municipal, district and federal court if you weren't convicted on it then it doesn't hold much bearing. The judge will see it, read it, review it and at least majority of the time that I witnessed they didn't even bring it up.

It comes back to what you were convicted of and had the strongest case on. I've seen people with multiple offenses that were plead down and the prosecutor pushed saying they plead and the judge stated numerous times that if in fact that we're the case now, then why not all those times as well, if you seen a pattern why not push for the tougher sentences, why agree to a plea?

Like I said, reality. I've read for over, what,  70 pages and it's been a lot of facts and fiction and wishful thinking. Honestly, I don't see this as being more than a simple slap on the hand and in the end the pet will still have been a pet which is now dead and forgotten just like Cecil and next season there will be another animal for everyone to focus on.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on May 25, 2016, 12:36:31 PM
Dare I ask.......

What if he did make the calls and get the permission from WDFW to shoot this bull? Who would be the bad guy at that point? This has been burning in the back of my head since the beginning of this hot mess.

We get it, or at least I do, they don't have the authority by law but If it turns out authority was given then he's walking.

He walks WDFW might need an unlisted information phone number :dunno: :rolleyes:
Great question, reply and comment. All three of you nailed it.

If that is what happened focus of anger over this incident will shift to the WDFW.

My prediction if this goes down. You'll still have the crowd who remains pissed off at Mr. Reichert for even calling for permission in the first place.
(stand by. I'm putting on my flame retardant suit)
For sure, nobody wins in this one, it is an absolute mess.  There will be plenty of blame to go around depending on what angle you are looking at it from.  In reality there are a ton of people to blame.  Todd, the guides, the landowner, WDFW, people who turned this animal into pretty much a pet, the list can go on and on.

The worst part is no matter where you put the blame it is a black eye for hunting in general.

Once that elk was targeted nothing good was going to come of it.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on May 25, 2016, 02:31:57 PM
I'd say, once those bulls were domesticated they were doomed. If not Mr Reichert,  then someone else probably would've. Let wild be wild.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on May 25, 2016, 02:42:55 PM
I'd say, once those bulls were domesticated they were doomed. If not Mr Reichert,  then someone else probably would've. Let wild be wild.
It's like deja vu all over again.  I think you said this a couple of months ago in this thread or another one on the same topic.  You're just not going to budge are you? Insert sarcasm emoji here.  I agree with you 100%, they were doomed and something would have happened to them anyway.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Legacy on May 25, 2016, 03:05:39 PM
To me Reichert's guilt or innocence is probably not as worrisome as what impact his taking of this bull (which by all accounts appears to have been a "pet", that had a name and that was fed regularly alfalfa hay in a fenced area by local kids) could have on legitimate hunters and hunting in general. Most of what I've read indicates this trophy was killed without any remote semblance of "fair chase" or any traditional notions of fair play or ethical hunting. So far, news of this episode has been kept fairly local and I'm hoping we don't end up with another "Cecil" incident once some anti-hunter individual or group uses social media to feign shock and outrage, which then spreads like wildfire and gets shared by others who chime in and paint all hunters as elitist and wealthy mass killers who care little for wildlife and animal rights. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on May 25, 2016, 03:19:16 PM
To me Reichert's guilt or innocence is probably not as worrisome as what impact his taking of this bull (which by all accounts appears to have been a "pet", that had a name and that was fed regularly alfalfa hay in a fenced area by local kids) could have on legitimate hunters and hunting in general. Most of what I've read indicates this trophy was killed without any remote semblance of "fair chase" or any traditional notions of fair play or ethical hunting. So far, news of this episode has been kept fairly local and I'm hoping we don't end up with another "Cecil" incident once some anti-hunter individual or group uses social media to feign shock and outrage, which then spreads like wildfire and gets shared by others who chime in and paint all hunters as elitist and wealthy mass killers who care little for wildlife and animal rights.

 Well said.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Miles on May 25, 2016, 03:30:15 PM
Bullwinkle sounds more like a moose name anyway...
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on May 25, 2016, 03:31:29 PM
Bullwinkle sounds more like a moose name anyway...
It doesn't make sense, does it?

I thought his name was Ranger.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bearpaw on May 25, 2016, 03:53:59 PM
To me Reichert's guilt or innocence is probably not as worrisome as what impact his taking of this bull (which by all accounts appears to have been a "pet", that had a name and that was fed regularly alfalfa hay in a fenced area by local kids) could have on legitimate hunters and hunting in general. Most of what I've read indicates this trophy was killed without any remote semblance of "fair chase" or any traditional notions of fair play or ethical hunting. So far, news of this episode has been kept fairly local and I'm hoping we don't end up with another "Cecil" incident once some anti-hunter individual or group uses social media to feign shock and outrage, which then spreads like wildfire and gets shared by others who chime in and paint all hunters as elitist and wealthy mass killers who care little for wildlife and animal rights.

 Well said.

I agree, it's also worrisome that some hunters themselves have made this such a big deal that it will harm hunters in the end.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on May 25, 2016, 04:22:35 PM
To me Reichert's guilt or innocence is probably not as worrisome as what impact his taking of this bull (which by all accounts appears to have been a "pet", that had a name and that was fed regularly alfalfa hay in a fenced area by local kids) could have on legitimate hunters and hunting in general. Most of what I've read indicates this trophy was killed without any remote semblance of "fair chase" or any traditional notions of fair play or ethical hunting. So far, news of this episode has been kept fairly local and I'm hoping we don't end up with another "Cecil" incident once some anti-hunter individual or group uses social media to feign shock and outrage, which then spreads like wildfire and gets shared by others who chime in and paint all hunters as elitist and wealthy mass killers who care little for wildlife and animal rights.

 Well said.

I agree, it's also worrisome that some hunters themselves have made this such a big deal that it will harm hunters in the end.

Hunters made this a circus. I get it, he was in the wrong for shooting a domestic animal, but by blowing this outta proportion we may have made things worse. Who knows at this point. Hopefully larry, curly, Moe & rocky (the other pet bulls) learn from T his and stay away.

Though I heard wdfw bungled an attempted tranquilizing and had to put 1 of them down. Another waste of resources.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bobcat on May 25, 2016, 04:31:10 PM
The main issue isn't how this bull elk was "domesticated" but that the elk tag the hunter used was not valid in the unit.

It's the same as if a guy with an eastern tag killed a bull in western Washington. It's illegal. Period. It's not that complicated.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: full choke on May 25, 2016, 04:38:22 PM
To me Reichert's guilt or innocence is probably not as worrisome as what impact his taking of this bull (which by all accounts appears to have been a "pet", that had a name and that was fed regularly alfalfa hay in a fenced area by local kids) could have on legitimate hunters and hunting in general. Most of what I've read indicates this trophy was killed without any remote semblance of "fair chase" or any traditional notions of fair play or ethical hunting. So far, news of this episode has been kept fairly local and I'm hoping we don't end up with another "Cecil" incident once some anti-hunter individual or group uses social media to feign shock and outrage, which then spreads like wildfire and gets shared by others who chime in and paint all hunters as elitist and wealthy mass killers who care little for wildlife and animal rights.

 Well said.

I agree, it's also worrisome that some hunters themselves have made this such a big deal that it will harm hunters in the end.

Hunters made this a circus. I get it, he was in the wrong for shooting a domestic animal, but by blowing this outta proportion we may have made things worse. Who knows at this point. Hopefully larry, curly, Moe & rocky (the other pet bulls) learn from T his and stay away.

Though I heard wdfw bungled an attempted tranquilizing and had to put 1 of them down. Another waste of resources.

No. He was wrong for shooting an animal in a closed unit. Quit trying to change the subject...
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 724wd on May 25, 2016, 04:48:30 PM
The main issue isn't how this bull elk was "domesticated" but that the elk tag the hunter used was not valid in the unit.

It's the same as if a guy with an eastern tag killed a bull in western Washington. It's illegal. Period. It's not that complicated.

 :yeah:  i couldn't give two poops about how the bull killed.  the bull was in a unit not open.  He should be held accountable for that, regardless of the name of the bull.  Also, the "calling WDFW" shouldn't be a defense, as the rules were already set.  The unit was closed to taking branch bulls.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on May 25, 2016, 05:16:35 PM
I agree with Plat.  And yes one of the other bulls in this group was wasted after being tangled.  They are wild animals and should be hunted, period. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on May 25, 2016, 05:24:19 PM
I know as I stated many times I know it's a closed unit. I'm not disputing that as that was proven from the beginning.  Read my previous posts today and you'll understand what I'm stating bobcat, full choke and 724.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on May 25, 2016, 05:48:48 PM
Wait........     was this bull shot with a full choke???
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 25, 2016, 06:11:01 PM
The main issue isn't how this bull elk was "domesticated" but that the elk tag the hunter used was not valid in the unit.

It's the same as if a guy with an eastern tag killed a bull in western Washington. It's illegal. Period. It's not that complicated.

There is no difference between him killing a Roosevelt on the coast with that tag and killing a bull in GMU 334.  The tag was no more valid for the latter than it was for the former.  If this defense is allowed to stand it throws the door wide open in the future. 

In order to get to a conclusion that everything was on the up and up, assumptions have to be accepted that demand a series of logical leaps and coincidences to all come together.  While that would not make it impossible it certainly complicates accepting that version of events.


Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on May 25, 2016, 07:05:58 PM
There is a big difference, it's actually happened here on the west side.  Errors were made, no charges were filed, but then again there wasn't the court of Huntwa to publicly crucify someone and assure their guilt.  I wonder if the charges get dropped off there won't be a civil suit filed against the wdfw and the individuals who granted permission.  I would think some of things posted on this forum would cause parties to settle and not want to go to trial.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: cbond3318 on May 25, 2016, 07:28:30 PM
I don't suppose routine calls to WDFW are recorded for training purposes ?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on May 25, 2016, 09:16:52 PM
I don't suppose routine calls to WDFW are recorded for training purposes ?

  And without a recording it's he said she said. If Tod Reichert is going to rely on his "we got permission over the phone" defense, the burden of proof is on him.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on May 25, 2016, 09:37:32 PM
There is a big difference, it's actually happened here on the west side.  Errors were made, no charges were filed, but then again there wasn't the court of Huntwa to publicly crucify someone and assure their guilt.  I wonder if the charges get dropped off there won't be a civil suit filed against the wdfw and the individuals who granted permission.  I would think some of things posted on this forum would cause parties to settle and not want to go to trial.

Ahhhh th he good old hunt wa court. Remember the big bull that got poached in the green river watershed? Or was it the cedar river watershed? Or was it washougal? This place is and people are funny for sure....

Oops, remember when Agnew killed the non typical record, flew in and out killed the same day flying??? Blah blah blah..... the list goes on and on...
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on May 25, 2016, 09:56:22 PM
There is a big difference, it's actually happened here on the west side.  Errors were made, no charges were filed, but then again there wasn't the court of Huntwa to publicly crucify someone and assure their guilt.  I wonder if the charges get dropped off there won't be a civil suit filed against the wdfw and the individuals who granted permission.  I would think some of things posted on this forum would cause parties to settle and not want to go to trial.

Ahhhh th he good old hunt wa court. Remember the big bull that got poached in the green river watershed? Or was it the cedar river watershed? Or was it washougal? This place is and people are funny for sure....

Oops, remember when Agnew killed the non typical record, flew in and out killed the same day flying??? Blah blah blah..... the list goes on and on...


It wasn't in the 'Shoug!!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on May 25, 2016, 10:14:00 PM
I woulda much rather seen "Bullwinkle" ironed out on I-90 by a semi!!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: DaveMonti on May 25, 2016, 10:35:03 PM
Wait........     was this bull shot with a full choke???

Let me clarify.  The bull died by choking on alfalfa. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Landowner on May 25, 2016, 11:33:22 PM
Under the subject of pot stirring, I haven't seen any criticism of the landowner who helped sentence a near tame elk to death.

Carry on.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on May 26, 2016, 12:10:26 AM
There is a big difference, it's actually happened here on the west side.  Errors were made, no charges were filed, but then again there wasn't the court of Huntwa to publicly crucify someone and assure their guilt.  I wonder if the charges get dropped off there won't be a civil suit filed against the wdfw and the individuals who granted permission.  I would think some of things posted on this forum would cause parties to settle and not want to go to trial.

remember when Agnew killed the non typical record, flew in and out killed the same day flying??? Blah blah blah..... the list goes on and on...

 A non issue and completely irrelevant to this case, let's not get it twisted and stick to the facts.
 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 26, 2016, 05:59:38 AM
Charges filed/charges not filed, Guilty plea or verdict/acquittal, can someone, anyone, please lay out a scenario in which this ever would have ended well? 

I simply cannot get my mind around what could have given anyone the notion that this was going to end well. 

Does that imply that there isn't anyone who thought this through to what the logical conclusion was? 

I keep asking and all I have seen so far can easily be recognized as  fallacious arguments consisting exclusively of reductio ad absurdum or offers to burn down yet another straw man.

Let's hear it:  Walk me through a scenario in which this was going to end well.   

Irrespective of the legal issue that were the focus of the discussion here, local people were already talking to reporters re: the undisputed fact that this bull elk was as tame as a petting zoo mascot. 

And as for damage done to the image of hunters in general, or even "trophy hunters in general, the fact that this act does not and never has had broad based acceptance as acceptable w/in the hunting community who have commented on it will do as much as can be done to put distance between hunters or trophy hunters and the irresponsible act of a few individuals  as ever could be once this became known to the general public.   
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on May 26, 2016, 06:08:11 AM
There is a big difference, it's actually happened here on the west side.  Errors were made, no charges were filed, but then again there wasn't the court of Huntwa to publicly crucify someone and assure their guilt.  I wonder if the charges get dropped off there won't be a civil suit filed against the wdfw and the individuals who granted permission.  I would think some of things posted on this forum would cause parties to settle and not want to go to trial.

remember when Agnew killed the non typical record, flew in and out killed the same day flying??? Blah blah blah..... the list goes on and on...

 A non issue and completely irrelevant to this case, let's not get it twisted and stick to the facts.

Oh....... Ok
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on May 26, 2016, 06:10:07 AM
There is a big difference, it's actually happened here on the west side.  Errors were made, no charges were filed, but then again there wasn't the court of Huntwa to publicly crucify someone and assure their guilt.  I wonder if the charges get dropped off there won't be a civil suit filed against the wdfw and the individuals who granted permission.  I would think some of things posted on this forum would cause parties to settle and not want to go to trial.

remember when Agnew killed the non typical record, flew in and out killed the same day flying??? Blah blah blah..... the list goes on and on...

 A non issue and completely irrelevant to this case, let's not get it twisted and stick to the facts.

Funny how it's the same folks making comments  on aforementioned threads....
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Miles on May 26, 2016, 06:26:48 AM
Everyone is all worked up over this pet elk that an old man shot.   Old Tod doesn't have too many more hunting seasons left in him and that's just a fact of life.  Let him have his day in court.  The self induced added stress probably isn't doing his body any favors.   
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: trophyhunt on May 26, 2016, 06:31:27 AM
I woulda much rather seen "Bullwinkle" ironed out on I-90 by a semi!!
:yeah: agreed, it would have been the end of the story.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Magnum_Willys on May 26, 2016, 06:32:25 AM
I simply cannot get my mind around what could have given anyone the notion that this was going to end well. 

Let's hear it:  Walk me through a scenario in which this was going to end well.

Lips shut.  Animal on wall not facebook.  Taken at firstlight. Landowner paid and happy, state paid and happy, hunter with trophy happy.  Old elk musta finally passed away.  End of story.   

Imo not right nor legal but thats the scenario you would think he woulda followed.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: turbo on May 26, 2016, 07:04:53 AM
I cant believe some of you on here are defending this guy. Shameful and embarrassing for the hunting community. Thanks..
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: dscubame on May 26, 2016, 08:03:47 AM
I simply cannot get my mind around what could have given anyone the notion that this was going to end well. 

Let's hear it:  Walk me through a scenario in which this was going to end well.

Lips shut.  Animal on wall not facebook.  Taken at firstlight. Landowner paid and happy, state paid and happy, hunter with trophy happy.  Old elk musta finally passed away.  End of story.   

Imo not right nor legal but thats the scenario you would think he woulda followed.

You left out the part where you move the whole now dead animal to a legal unit to open it and leave the gut pile.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Alchase on May 26, 2016, 10:13:22 AM
No. He was wrong for shooting an animal in a closed unit. Quit trying to change the subject...

This and only this!

If this single part, had not happened none of this discussion would be happening.

Be responsible for your own dang actions, quit twisting and tweak the details to try to make it seem he was not at fault.


I cant believe some of you on here are defending this guy. Shameful and embarrassing for the hunting community. Thanks..

Honestly, this bothers me as much as the poaching incident itself.

What it boils down to is:

Poaching and defending a poacher.

Everything else is just:

 "trying to pick up a piece of poo by the clean end"
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on May 26, 2016, 10:23:30 AM
Actually it boils down to whether or not it's "poaching" if given permission by someone in WDFW.  Also whether or not that person had the authority to authorize the "hunt".

I'd still like to know exactly what the question was when they supposedly asked for permission.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on May 26, 2016, 10:39:52 AM
 :yeah: :yeah: :yeah: :yeah: :yeah: somebody else gets it. "IF" permission was given/authorized I honestly see him walking whether or not the official was legally authorized to by law.

As I said in every post I'm not defending, supporting or condoning his actions just stated what I believe will occur.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on May 26, 2016, 10:53:16 AM
"IF" permission was given/authorized

 But what you fail to understand is that there is nobody within the WDFW that has that authorization, spin or no spin, that is fact!

 So his, and his fans "defense" is nothing more than slight of hand, an attempt to lead everyone into a false direction.

 He killed the bull in a closed unit. According to state law, there is nobody with authority that can change the regs with a phone call........everything else is spin!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bearpaw on May 26, 2016, 11:10:16 AM
"IF" permission was given/authorized

 But what you fail to understand is that there is nobody within the WDFW that has that authorization, spin or no spin, that is fact!

 So his, and his fans "defense" is nothing more than slight of hand, an attempt to lead everyone into a false direction.

 He killed the bull in a closed unit. According to state law, there is nobody with authority that can change the regs with a phone call........everything else is spin!

I think only the commission, the governor, and possibly the director have the authority to change what units are open or not open. However, I still think it's a reasonable defense for the defendant that he was given permission to hunt by the regulating agency. From the beginning of this topic I've thought that's how this will all boil down.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on May 26, 2016, 11:13:11 AM
"IF" permission was given/authorized

 But what you fail to understand is that there is nobody within the WDFW that has that authorization, spin or no spin, that is fact!

 So his, and his fans "defense" is nothing more than slight of hand, an attempt to lead everyone into a false direction.

 He killed the bull in a closed unit. According to state law, there is nobody with authority that can change the regs with a phone call........everything else is spin!

But as I mentioned earlier...and hypothetically, if there was a phone call, and a WDFW game warden told Mr Reichert he had the approval and to go ahead and shoot the bull, who's fault is it at that point?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bearpaw on May 26, 2016, 11:15:07 AM
"IF" permission was given/authorized

 But what you fail to understand is that there is nobody within the WDFW that has that authorization, spin or no spin, that is fact!

 So his, and his fans "defense" is nothing more than slight of hand, an attempt to lead everyone into a false direction.

 He killed the bull in a closed unit. According to state law, there is nobody with authority that can change the regs with a phone call........everything else is spin!

But as I mentioned earlier...and hypothetically, if there was a phone call, and a WDFW game warden told Mr Reichert he had the approval and to go ahead and shoot the bull, who's fault is it at that point?

I would imagine there will be a reprimand to whomever gave the ultimate OK to go hunt with the muzzy!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on May 26, 2016, 11:22:35 AM
:yeah: :yeah: :yeah: :yeah: :yeah: somebody else gets it. "IF" permission was given/authorized I honestly see him walking whether or not the official was legally authorized to by law.

As I said in every post I'm not defending, supporting or condoning his actions just stated what I believe will occur.

Not really I've gotten it all along..
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Jpmiller on May 26, 2016, 12:15:09 PM
When I was looking into purchasing a new hunting bow I called WDFW for some clarifications on what were and weren't legal. They were surprisingly helpful and took their clarifications an purchased a bow.

Should I have not trusted the word of the WDFW employee who answered the phone? I know it's not exactly apples to apples and it's the individuals responsibility to know the law but when you don't know the law how else should you get clarification.

Whether or not he was told by a game official that it was ok doesn't seem to be known for a fact yet but if he was told it's ok it is hard for me to condemn him.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bearpaw on May 26, 2016, 12:18:31 PM
When I was looking into purchasing a new hunting bow I called WDFW for some clarifications on what were and weren't legal. They were surprisingly helpful and took their clarifications an purchased a bow.

Should I have not trusted the word of the WDFW employee who answered the phone? I know it's not exactly apples to apples and it's the individuals responsibility to know the law but when you don't know the law how else should you get clarification.

Whether or not he was told by a game official that it was ok doesn't seem to be known for a fact yet but if he was told it's ok it is hard for me to condemn him.

 :yeah: That's exactly where I'm at, I've asked questions many times in multiple states and have trusted the responses that I get.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: trophyhunt on May 26, 2016, 12:31:49 PM
"IF" permission was given/authorized

 But what you fail to understand is that there is nobody within the WDFW that has that authorization, spin or no spin, that is fact!

 So his, and his fans "defense" is nothing more than slight of hand, an attempt to lead everyone into a false direction.

 He killed the bull in a closed unit. According to state law, there is nobody with authority that can change the regs with a phone call........everything else is spin!

But as I mentioned earlier...and hypothetically, if there was a phone call, and a WDFW game warden told Mr Reichert he had the approval and to go ahead and shoot the bull, who's fault is it at that point?
WDFW's fault I would say.  That seems pretty simple to me, especially if they admit giving him permission.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: walt on May 26, 2016, 12:40:08 PM
I'm curious how many times he's bought the tag in the past and what are the credentials of the "guides" involved?  I find it really hard to believe none of them knew the regs for the tag and gmu and therefore had to call wdfw.  :dunno:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on May 26, 2016, 12:54:44 PM
I'm curious how many times he's bought the tag in the past and what are the credentials of the "guides" involved?  I find it really hard to believe none of them knew the regs for the tag and gmu and therefore had to call wdfw.  :dunno:
Me too, but........none of that will matter if someone really did give them the go ahead and is willing to admit to it.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on May 26, 2016, 01:17:16 PM
 :yeah:  "IF" permission was granted, that's what it's going to boil down to. It says per rcw/wac who can and can't but the enforcement/regulatory arm of the State allegedly gave permission whether they had the authority or not.

"IF" they own up to it then the argument is they did and why should he be held at fault "IF" they did. WDFW is in my opinion the at-fault party in this for allegedly authoring this incident. 

Sure, this gentleman had a part in this, but the fault lies with the agency for allegedly authoring it knowing full well rcw/wac stated they didn't have that authority.

Essentially, he's got a "get out of jail" free card and he's using it. This gentleman and his "guides" knew the regs, knew the boundaries, knew what weapon, but the alleged permission is what's the turning point.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: trophyhunt on May 26, 2016, 01:51:31 PM
:yeah:  "IF" permission was granted, that's what it's going to boil down to. It says per rcw/wac who can and can't but the enforcement/regulatory arm of the State allegedly gave permission whether they had the authority or not.

"IF" they own up to it then the argument is they did and why should he be held at fault "IF" they did. WDFW is in my opinion the at-fault party in this for allegedly authoring this incident. 

Sure, this gentleman had a part in this, but the fault lies with the agency for allegedly authoring it knowing full well rcw/wac stated they didn't have that authority.

Essentially, he's got a "get out of jail" free card and he's using it. This gentleman and his "guides" knew the regs, knew the boundaries, knew what weapon, but the alleged permission is what's the turning point.
Exactly, and that should be the end of this thread, period.  Simple in my mind.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on May 26, 2016, 02:25:44 PM
Me too jerry, but the whining will continue ...
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: trophyhunt on May 26, 2016, 02:46:56 PM
Me too jerry, but the whining will continue ...
:chuckle: lol, amen brother!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on May 26, 2016, 04:09:56 PM
 Should be a piece of cake for him to prove, all he has to do is hand over the recording or get the WDFW agent to admit it under oath.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on May 26, 2016, 04:19:24 PM
Should be a piece of cake for him to prove, all he has to do is hand over the recording or get the WDFW agent to admit it under oath.
There so many "if's" to this but "if" that happens this thread will absolutely blow up. There will have to be two mods assigned to this thread just to cover it around the clock.

The only thing that will save it is "if" they provide proof draw results are released the next day.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bullkllr on May 26, 2016, 04:36:24 PM
When I was looking into purchasing a new hunting bow I called WDFW for some clarifications on what were and weren't legal. They were surprisingly helpful and took their clarifications an purchased a bow.

Should I have not trusted the word of the WDFW employee who answered the phone? I know it's not exactly apples to apples and it's the individuals responsibility to know the law but when you don't know the law how else should you get clarification.

Whether or not he was told by a game official that it was ok doesn't seem to be known for a fact yet but if he was told it's ok it is hard for me to condemn him.

Somehow I doubt the information they gave you was in direct contradiction to what is available other places, but I could be wrong.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Jpmiller on May 26, 2016, 04:48:48 PM
When I was looking into purchasing a new hunting bow I called WDFW for some clarifications on what were and weren't legal. They were surprisingly helpful and took their clarifications an purchased a bow.

Should I have not trusted the word of the WDFW employee who answered the phone? I know it's not exactly apples to apples and it's the individuals responsibility to know the law but when you don't know the law how else should you get clarification.

Whether or not he was told by a game official that it was ok doesn't seem to be known for a fact yet but if he was told it's ok it is hard for me to condemn him.

Somehow I doubt the information they gave you was in direct contradiction to what is available other places, but I could be wrong.

It made sense with what I was reading in the regs the way they were able to explain it true, but I do not think the same way everyone else does. There are alot of thing people can't quite figure out that I can. I am no smarter than the average person.

The question is where should you go if you clarification? If not WDFW then where?
 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on May 26, 2016, 05:00:10 PM
 :yeah: they should learn from this incident and create a policy that addresses this issue so it won't happen again. Have a designated dept or person (s) be the ones to provide regulatory answers and not just Joe Schmoe employee that guesses because they don't understand themselves. I don't think all the wdfw employees know and understand the regs much less are outdoors type people.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: mfswallace on May 26, 2016, 05:09:28 PM
No clarification needed on this simple issue! Closed gmu for branched antler bulls. My 6 year old understands it, why can't 257 and everyone excusing this poaching incident understand no call was needed in the first place. How many gov tags has he had and he's dense enough to not understand something so simple :yike:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Ghost Hunter on May 26, 2016, 05:13:08 PM
No clarification needed on this simple issue! Closed gmu for branched antler bulls. My 6 year old understands it, why can't 257 and everyone excusing this poaching incident understand no call was needed in the first place. How many gov tags has he had and he's dense enough to not understand something so simple :yike:

Tell us how you really feel. :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle: :tup:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on May 26, 2016, 05:19:12 PM
It is that simple. That's not the issue, what I'm raising is the strong possibility that "IF" he got the okay from wdfw he's more than likely walking. Not denying he nor his "guides" didn't know as I'm sure they knew but the fact that "IF" he allegedly got permission from an official that was legally per rcw/wac not authorized to do so then the brunt of the responsibility is wdfw's. A judge or jury that hears from an wdfw official that they authorized it willfully knowing that per rcw/wac they couldn't but still did are accepting the responsibility for changing the tag requirements. Even though they can't per rcw/wac. Any judge/jury is going to say it was his responsibility to know, but he was given permission by an official of wdfw and he should share the responsibility on his behalf but again, he was authorized to.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: mfswallace on May 26, 2016, 05:24:16 PM
It is that simple. That's not the issue, what I'm raising is the strong possibility that "IF" he got the okay from wdfw he's more than likely walking. Not denying he nor his "guides" didn't know as I'm sure they knew but the fact that "IF" he allegedly got permission from an official that was legally per rcw/wac not authorized to do so then the brunt of the responsibility is wdfw's. A judge or jury that hears from an wdfw official that they authorized it willfully knowing that per rcw/wac they couldn't but still did are accepting the responsibility for changing the tag requirements. Even though they can't per rcw/wac. Any judge/jury is going to say it was his responsibility to know, but he was given permission by an official of wdfw and he should share the responsibility on his behalf but again, he was authorized to.

By all means they should share the responsibility and said wdfw employee/employees should be held responsible on a criminal level just like tod and crew :twocents:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on May 26, 2016, 05:53:37 PM
No clarification needed on this simple issue! Closed gmu for branched antler bulls. My 6 year old understands it, why can't 257 and everyone excusing this poaching incident understand no call was needed in the first place. How many gov tags has he had and he's dense enough to not understand something so simple :yike:

Some of you guys its just cut and dry, hopefully you guys don't ever get jammed up!!....

And here we go, " how many governor tags has he had"??  Though most of you will never admit it, if the tables were turned and it was a everyday Joe that did this, it woulda only been a couple pages. Because of the accused is who he is, Tod is held to a higher standard.. He's gonna walk...
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: h20hunter on May 26, 2016, 06:07:53 PM
A poll would be interesting.  Simple yes or no. Walk or no walk. My money is he walks with zero repurcussions. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on May 26, 2016, 06:11:31 PM
And I'll be willing to bet, knowing the state and how they do things, the person that gave him the go ahead might get a verbal reprimand at most...
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: h20hunter on May 26, 2016, 06:13:29 PM
Fine.  $1 says they get a stern talking to!  :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 26, 2016, 06:20:35 PM
No clarification needed on this simple issue! Closed gmu for branched antler bulls. My 6 year old understands it, why can't 257 and everyone excusing this poaching incident understand no call was needed in the first place. How many gov tags has he had and he's dense enough to not understand something so simple :yike:

In order to get to a conclusion that everything was on the up and up, assumptions have to be accepted that demand a series of logical leaps and coincidences to all come together.  While that would not make it impossible it certainly complicates preferring that version of events.


*****************************************

Did the call go like this:   

Caller: Is this South Central Big Game Auction Tag valid for elk under any circumstances in GMU 334?

WDFW:  What does it say in the Game Regs?

Caller: It says - Elk: Any 300 or 500 series GMU open to elk hunting except GMUs not open to branch antlered bull elk hunting

WDFW: Does GMU 334 have any elk season that allows the taking of branch antlered bull elk?

Caller:  No, not that I can locate. 

WDFW:  I think you have just answered your own question.

Or did the call go like this:

Caller: Can a disabled hunter shoot an elk with a high-power rifle in GMU 334 south of the canal?

WDFW:  No, anyone hunting elk in that area would need to use a slug gun, muzzle loader, a bow, a crossbow or a hand gun that meets the firearm restriction.

Caller:  Even if the disabled hunter has a South Central Big Game Auction Tag if he wants to shoot an elk in GMU 334?

WDFW:  Yes, even if the disabled hunter has a South Central Big Game Tag. 

Caller:  So it is OK to hunt elk in GMU 334, but he would have to use a muzzle loader?

WDFW:  Yes, or some other weapon that is legal to hunt elk with in GMU 334.

Caller:   Hey guys, guess what, bla bla @ WDFW just gave the all clear.     


Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on May 26, 2016, 06:23:31 PM
Fine.  $1 says they get a stern talking to!  :chuckle:

Oh I bet!! Grin
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on May 26, 2016, 06:38:56 PM

I keep asking and all I have seen so far can easily be recognized as  fallacious arguments consisting exclusively of reductio ad absurdum or offers to burn down yet another straw man.





This might be the funniest thing I've read on the inteweb all year..... Dead language and all.

And in that spirit:    I've ottagay etgay ovingmay.




Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on May 26, 2016, 06:46:58 PM
I suspect the call didn't go like either scenario. Something tells me that the call coincidentally went after an unsuccessful and rather unfortunate incident involving the death of one of the other pets and when the call was made it was asking permission to fulfill the raffle tag since they were trying to move the pets anyways and bungled a previous attempt.

Subsequently, resulting in the official as previously stated said they would call back as they needed to find out from the powers above if that tag holder would be approved to kill one of the pets. The call was returned stating he was given authorization and he proceeded forward.

So, why no uproar over the other pet dying twisted in barb wire fencing and having to be put down?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Todd_ID on May 26, 2016, 06:53:03 PM
My word, this is the train that just keeps on wrecking.  Why not let it die for a while until the judge has a say?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: danderson on May 26, 2016, 06:55:22 PM
  Having been the recipient of a incentive tag I know mine came with a detailed letter explaining all the open units , maps and restrictions for that particular hunt, also included were  the  names and phone numbers of the game department contacts for the hunt, with my tag I had to call in and report each day were I was hunting, no wiggle room for a person to say they didn't  know the stipulations of the hunt, the tag holder is ultimately responsible for making sure the the hunt is legal, there was no baiting for a particular answer allowed, it was pretty black and white.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on May 26, 2016, 06:59:16 PM
I suspect the call didn't go like either scenario. Something tells me that the call coincidentally went after an unsuccessful and rather unfortunate incident involving the death of one of the other pets and when the call was made it was asking permission to fulfill the raffle tag since they were trying to move the pets anyways and bungled a previous attempt.

Subsequently, resulting in the official as previously stated said they would call back as they needed to find out from the powers above if that tag holder would be approved to kill one of the pets. The call was returned stating he was given authorization and he proceeded forward.

So, why no uproar over the other pet dying twisted in barb wire fencing and having to be put down?

All I can say to that is:   "I keep asking and all I have seen so far can easily be recognized as  fallacious arguments consisting exclusively of reductio ad absurdum or offers to burn down yet another straw man."

 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 26, 2016, 07:01:26 PM
  Having been the recipient of a incentive tag I know mine came with a detailed letter explaining all the open units , maps and restrictions for that particular hunt, also included were  the  names and phone numbers of the game department contacts for the hunt, with my tag I had to call in and report each day were I was hunting, no wiggle room for a person to say they didn't  know the stipulations of the hunt, the tag holder is ultimately responsible for making sure the the hunt is legal, there was no baiting for a particular answer allowed, it was pretty black and white.

 :tup:  Yup, that is the way it works. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: trophyhunt on May 26, 2016, 07:05:52 PM
A poll would be interesting.  Simple yes or no. Walk or no walk. My money is he walks with zero repurcussions.
start the poll!  He will walk, IF fish and game acknowledge that they gave him permission!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: h20hunter on May 26, 2016, 07:07:08 PM
 :chuckle: :chuckle:

I think there is plenty of speculation and drama without a formal poll.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: popeshawnpaul on May 26, 2016, 08:04:40 PM
How can you do a poll when nobody (except JDHasty) knows all the exact facts.  The poll would ask...  What do you think the facts are and assuming you think you know the facts what do you think 6 random people that you don't know will find for the defendant if this case ever gets to trial...?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: trophyhunt on May 26, 2016, 08:15:34 PM
How can you do a poll when nobody (except JDHasty) knows all the exact facts.  The poll would ask...  What do you think the facts are and assuming you think you know the facts what do you think 6 random people that you don't know will find for the defendant if this case ever gets to trial...?
Im thinking the poll could be," if the Wdfw gave the guy permission, is he guilty of poaching or any crime"?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on May 26, 2016, 08:52:49 PM
 What poll should ask is "Do you believe Tod Reichert can prove he was given permission by WDFW?"

 Because if he can't, it's a open and shut case! :twocents:
Title: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: mfswallace on May 26, 2016, 09:11:32 PM
No clarification needed on this simple issue! Closed gmu for branched antler bulls. My 6 year old understands it, why can't 257 and everyone excusing this poaching incident understand no call was needed in the first place. How many gov tags has he had and he's dense enough to not understand something so simple :yike:

Some of you guys its just cut and dry, hopefully you guys don't ever get jammed up!!....

And here we go, " how many governor tags has he had"??  Though most of you will never admit it, if the tables were turned and it was a everyday Joe that did this, it woulda only been a couple pages. Because of the accused is who he is, Tod is held to a higher standard.. He's gonna walk...

An average joe wouldn't have been hunting in a closed unit but since tod has all the money he needs to keep breaking the law he doesn't give a ....
Keep going 257 but poaching is poaching and as Danderson explained you get very explicit instructions on where to hunt so he should have never hired you and your crew to look in 334 for a branched antlered bull...
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 26, 2016, 09:13:59 PM
How can you do a poll when nobody (except JDHasty) knows all the exact facts.  The poll would ask...  What do you think the facts are and assuming you think you know the facts what do you think 6 random people that you don't know will find for the defendant if this case ever gets to trial...?

I am confident that what I have stated as fact is accurate.  As far as what are my recollections re: the earlier incident that took place in 2007 and wrapped up in 2012 I have made it clear that this is what I recall when I could not link to validation that documented fact I referenced.  As far as the alleged call, I have said:  Given the reputation of the WDFW individual that the "permission" has been attributed to, I am skeptical that explicit permission was granted.  I have also said I am skeptical that that individual's direct supervisor would have signed off as well.   

I do not know this:  There is probable cause to file charges and there was little chance, from day one, that charges would not be filed.     
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bean Counter on May 26, 2016, 09:14:41 PM
My word, this is the train that just keeps on wrecking.  Why not let it die for a while until the judge has a say?

We interrupt this regularly scheduled urinating match to bring you an important announcement:



 .... That is all. Thank you  :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on May 26, 2016, 09:24:04 PM
Anybody else not really care that he shot a pet? Honestly, he can have all the pets he wants just leave the wild ones alone as I'd like to get them. :tup:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on May 26, 2016, 09:26:36 PM
I bet, if it was me that shot the pet this wouldn't have garnered 70 plus pages combined. :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 26, 2016, 09:26:50 PM
I simply cannot get my mind around what could have given anyone the notion that this was going to end well. 

Let's hear it:  Walk me through a scenario in which this was going to end well.

Lips shut.  Animal on wall not facebook.  Taken at firstlight. Landowner paid and happy, state paid and happy, hunter with trophy happy.  Old elk musta finally passed away.  End of story.   

Imo not right nor legal but thats the scenario you would think he woulda followed.

The fact is that in the days that followed there was posting of photos online bragging as well as boasting in the local watering holes. 

If you think this did not char the hind end of a heck of a lot of locals who knew that this bull was there, but it was not legal to kill him... you are not living in the real world.  Once word started to circulate of the location in which the bull was shot their butts were burnt to a crisp. 

IMHO, the perps tried to slip in after most people had left for the day, drop the bull, load him into the bed of a truck without leaving any evidence, and GTH outa' GMU 334 before anyone was wise to what had transpired. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: chester on May 26, 2016, 09:38:29 PM


Some of you guys its just cut and dry, hopefully you guys don't ever get jammed up!!....

And here we go, " how many governor tags has he had"??  Though most of you will never admit it, if the tables were turned and it was a everyday Joe that did this, it woulda only been a couple pages. Because of the accused is who he is, Tod is held to a higher standard.. He's gonna walk...

Higher standard? If this was an average joe you are correct it would have only been a couple pages, because Average joe would have lost his vehicle, weapons, and the bull immediately.
They wouldn't have drug on so long filing charges .
All the defenders I've seen here just seem to for lack of a better way to put it, just assume money makes you above the law.

Closed unit+dead bull= poached . It's pretty a simple.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on May 27, 2016, 12:26:53 AM
I simply cannot get my mind around what could have given anyone the notion that this was going to end well. 

Let's hear it:  Walk me through a scenario in which this was going to end well.

Lips shut.  Animal on wall not facebook.  Taken at firstlight. Landowner paid and happy, state paid and happy, hunter with trophy happy.  Old elk musta finally passed away.  End of story.   

Imo not right nor legal but thats the scenario you would think he woulda followed.

The fact is that in the days that followed there was posting of photos online bragging as well as boasting in the local watering holes. 

If you think this did not char the hind end of a heck of a lot of locals who knew that this bull was there, but it was not legal to kill him... you are not living in the real world.  Once word started to circulate of the location in which the bull was shot their butts were burnt to a crisp. 

IMHO, the perps tried to slip in after most people had left for the day, drop the bull, load him into the bed of a truck without leaving any evidence, and GTH outa' GMU 334 before anyone was wise to what had transpired.

I notice folks are worried, well some folks are, worried about this whole incident giving hunting a "black eye". Well, nothing is pretty or kind about killin, it is what it is, but it's not pretty period.... some have smeared this case far and wide to further they're agenda, whatever that may be. The funny thing is they only get mileage here... is it a wolf in sheeps clothing???
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: KNOPHISH on May 27, 2016, 05:40:31 AM
I have read that he's a handicapped hunter, What is his disability & does he have a sticker?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 27, 2016, 05:47:21 AM
I simply cannot get my mind around what could have given anyone the notion that this was going to end well. 

Let's hear it:  Walk me through a scenario in which this was going to end well.

Lips shut.  Animal on wall not facebook.  Taken at firstlight. Landowner paid and happy, state paid and happy, hunter with trophy happy.  Old elk musta finally passed away.  End of story.   

Imo not right nor legal but thats the scenario you would think he woulda followed.

The fact is that in the days that followed there was posting of photos online bragging as well as boasting in the local watering holes. 

If you think this did not char the hind end of a heck of a lot of locals who knew that this bull was there, but it was not legal to kill him... you are not living in the real world.  Once word started to circulate of the location in which the bull was shot their butts were burnt to a crisp. 

IMHO, the perps tried to slip in after most people had left for the day, drop the bull, load him into the bed of a truck without leaving any evidence, and GTH outa' GMU 334 before anyone was wise to what had transpired.

I notice folks are worried, well some folks are, worried about this whole incident giving hunting a "black eye". Well, nothing is pretty or kind about killin, it is what it is, but it's not pretty period.... some have smeared this case far and wide to further they're agenda, whatever that may be. The funny thing is they only get mileage here... is it a wolf in sheeps clothing???

I do not see how it gives "hunting a black eye" when it is evident that only a small minority within the hunting community will validate the decision to target and kill this elk.  Fact of the matter is, if a poll were put up It would not surprise me if north of 90% of the people right here on this forum, asking if shooting this animal was a responsible thing to do, it would not surprise me if north of 90% chose no as apposed to yes.  In other words, most hunters would not think this was going to end well.

As far as the legalities go, I am aware of facts that lead me to the decision that it was Unlawful Hunting of Big Game II, if there is anything that exonerates those involved... WDFW and the Kittitas County Prosecutor have not recognized it.  If they had, filing charges would not have been such an easy decision. 

I don't know if there is anything out there to exonerate these folks, but as I have said:  I'm skeptical.  In the first place no one has the authority to "give permission," and secondarily I am not inclined to give the benefit of the doubt to individuals who have acted in the manner that those making that claim have acted.     

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: HntnFsh on May 27, 2016, 06:50:29 AM
I have read that he's a handicapped hunter, What is his disability & does he have a sticker?

Curious how that's relevant to this case? Or were you just curious about that?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on May 27, 2016, 07:19:32 AM
Anybody else not really care that he shot a pet? Honestly, he can have all the pets he wants just leave the wild ones alone as I'd like to get them. :tup:


Hmmmmmmm.........    That's a really interesting perspective.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 2MANY on May 27, 2016, 07:24:14 AM
This is a forum not a "CASE".

Obviously their are physical limitations at the hunter's age.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: HntnFsh on May 27, 2016, 07:28:00 AM
This is a forum not a "CASE".

Obviously their are physical limitations at the hunter's age.

If you haven't noticed this thread is about a particular case. And whether Todd is disabled or has physical limitations affects this case how? Not at all from what I can see!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: KNOPHISH on May 27, 2016, 07:31:57 AM
I have read that he's a handicapped hunter, What is his disability & does he have a sticker?

Curious how that's relevant to this case? Or were you just curious about that?
Was thinking disabled get special privileges. Not sure it would pertain to the case.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on May 27, 2016, 07:33:34 AM
The topic of locking this thread again has been brought up by the mod's for discussion again. Name calling and meaningless insults need to stop or the lock will happen.
Please keep that in mind moving forward.

 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on May 27, 2016, 07:34:26 AM
I have read that he's a handicapped hunter, What is his disability & does he have a sticker?

Curious how that's relevant to this case? Or were you just curious about that?
Was thinking disabled get special privileges. Not sure it would pertain to the case.

They do. Privileges like shooting from a vehicle, special permits, etc. Not shooting bulls in closed units.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 2MANY on May 27, 2016, 07:35:58 AM
This is a forum not a "CASE".

Obviously their are physical limitations at the hunter's age.

If you haven't noticed this thread is about a particular case. And whether Todd is disabled or has physical limitations affects this case how? Not at all from what I can see!

Toledo is a small town isn't it?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on May 27, 2016, 07:57:41 AM
This topic is so  >:( , it's more  >:( than the Bigfoot thread. >:(  I think we can squeeze 400 plus pages out of this. :chuckle:  I mean... >:(
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on May 27, 2016, 07:58:39 AM
This is a forum not a "CASE".

Obviously their are physical limitations at the hunter's age.

If you haven't noticed this thread is about a particular case. And whether Todd is disabled or has physical limitations affects this case how? Not at all from what I can see!

Toledo is a small town isn't it?
:dunno:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: HntnFsh on May 27, 2016, 08:24:49 AM
This is a forum not a "CASE".

Obviously their are physical limitations at the hunter's age.

If you haven't noticed this thread is about a particular case. And whether Todd is disabled or has physical limitations affects this case how? Not at all from what I can see!

Toledo is a small town isn't it?

Sure is. Whatcha getting at?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: HUNTINCOUPLE on May 27, 2016, 08:29:57 AM
Is there a shoulder mount of this Bullwinkle Bull to view somewhere? With all the attention he should be put in the Smithsonian Museum or somewhere?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: HntnFsh on May 27, 2016, 09:00:14 AM
The topic of locking this thread again has been brought up by the mod's for discussion again. Name calling and meaningless insults need to stop or the lock will happen.
Please keep that in mind moving forward.

I understand how difficult it can be for the mods to stay on top of this. But it would be a shame to punish the majority because of the minority. What about just coming down a little harder on the offenders?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on May 27, 2016, 09:05:18 AM
The topic of locking this thread again has been brought up by the mod's for discussion again. Name calling and meaningless insults need to stop or the lock will happen.
Please keep that in mind moving forward.

I understand how difficult it can be for the mods to stay on top of this. But it would be a shame to punish the majority because of the minority. What about just coming down a little harder on the offenders?

There have been entire threads on this topic deleted, there have been multiple members banned, probably a dozen warnings thrown out and multiple posts in this thread warning others.
Not sure how much more we can do to get folks to cooperate. We all have jobs, lives, families, etc. We don't get paid to do this contrary to what might be popular belief. We are not babysitters and the adults on here participating in this thread should be able to realize that. If they can't, I'm afraid we can't help.


Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: HntnFsh on May 27, 2016, 09:11:34 AM
The topic of locking this thread again has been brought up by the mod's for discussion again. Name calling and meaningless insults need to stop or the lock will happen.
Please keep that in mind moving forward.

I understand how difficult it can be for the mods to stay on top of this. But it would be a shame to punish the majority because of the minority. What about just coming down a little harder on the offenders?

There have been entire threads on this topic deleted, there have been multiple members banned, probably a dozen warnings thrown out and multiple posts in this thread warning others.
Not sure how much more we can do to get folks to cooperate. We all have jobs, lives, families, etc. We don't get paid to do this contrary to what might be popular belief. We are not babysitters and the adults on here participating in this thread should be able to realize that. If they can't, I'm afraid we can't help.

Cant argue with that! Unfortunately I believe that the whole objective of some people on here is to get the thread deleted.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: DaveMonti on May 27, 2016, 09:14:50 AM
I personally don't see any value of keeping this open.  The same people keep repeating the same "facts", same theories as to why this happened, theories on what was going through peoples minds, and even speculating on the mental health of the folks involved. 

However, money is to be made by internet page views, and this topic, along with other useless threads like "Bigfoot", "Word Association Game" and "Chain Reaction Game", all generate consistent numbers of views, and money.  I can't blame anyone for keeping them going, despite their uselessness. 

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on May 27, 2016, 09:21:40 AM
I personally don't see any value of keeping this open.  The same people keep repeating the same "facts", same theories as to why this happened, theories on what was going through peoples minds, and even speculating on the mental health of the folks involved. 

However, money is to be made by internet page views, and this topic, along with other useless threads like "Bigfoot", "Word Association Game" and "Chain Reaction Game", all generate consistent numbers of views, and money.  I can't blame anyone for keeping them going, despite their uselessness. 



I normally agree with you on most everything, Dave...but I gotta disagree on this one. I don't see a problem with a few threads where folks are having a good time and not starting trouble or endlessly complaining about things. The last 3 threads you mentioned are the ones I'm referring to. This isn't exactly a cash cow for anyone. What I mean by that is I'm pretty sure this forum barely makes enough money as it stands for Dale to not have to pay out of pocket to keep it up and running.

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on May 27, 2016, 09:33:27 AM
I can say that I have gone full circle on this one because of all of the dialogue.  There are those that are hard set one way or the other but there is a lot going on here if you can filter through it all.

First I started out thinking no way would he shoot a bull in a closed unit.  I argued that moving the bull before field dressing was no biggie, it was probably a request of the landowner.  Then the confirmation that it was in a closed unit.  Then the rumors of a phone call.  Each step of the way I have had a different opinion on what might have happened.

I think more than anything, this should be learning experience for everyone to not jump to conclusions and always be mindful of what you are doing and how it could be viewed and interpreted by others.  Not only by those in your circle but other hunters outside your circle and non hunters.

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 2MANY on May 27, 2016, 09:53:53 AM
This is a forum not a "CASE".

Obviously their are physical limitations at the hunter's age.

If you haven't noticed this thread is about a particular case. And whether Todd is disabled or has physical limitations affects this case how? Not at all from what I can see!

Toledo is a small town isn't it?

Sure is. Whatcha getting at?

What I was getting at is this is such a grand standing type issue, the town is small, and the individual is well known. I'm sure the locals have many of the facts that are considered not relevant. My 2 cents.
No more.............no less.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: DaveMonti on May 27, 2016, 10:48:46 AM
I personally don't see any value of keeping this open.  The same people keep repeating the same "facts", same theories as to why this happened, theories on what was going through peoples minds, and even speculating on the mental health of the folks involved. 

However, money is to be made by internet page views, and this topic, along with other useless threads like "Bigfoot", "Word Association Game" and "Chain Reaction Game", all generate consistent numbers of views, and money.  I can't blame anyone for keeping them going, despite their uselessness. 



I normally agree with you on most everything, Dave...but I gotta disagree on this one. I don't see a problem with a few threads where folks are having a good time and not starting trouble or endlessly complaining about things. The last 3 threads you mentioned are the ones I'm referring to. This isn't exactly a cash cow for anyone. What I mean by that is I'm pretty sure this forum barely makes enough money as it stands for Dale to not have to pay out of pocket to keep it up and running.


I'm quite sure that nobody is getting rich off of this site, but the truth is that these threads do generate clicks, views, and responses that at least help the site break even financially.  I don't blame anyone at all.  I personally don't look at the three threads I mentioned after I checked them out for the first time.  Sure, people are having fun, but I personally don't see any value or entertainment in the three threads I mentioned. 

As far as this topic, there have been LOTS of warnings (certainly more than a dozen), no real useful dialogue, and a few other threads shut down due to the risk of lawsuits.  Why keep this one alive?  It's been beaten to death, is riskier than other topics, and probably takes a LOT of time to moderate, with nothing of value coming out of it.

Why keep it alive despite all this?  The reason is simple, it helps to generate income for the site, and I don't blame anyone for that.  Without 70+ pages, thousands of views, the site may be losing money instead of breaking even.  Things always get down to money, and when the risk of losing money through legal action becomes greater than the benefit of clicks, this thread will be shut down and another one started.  That's business.  I can't believe that the reason this thread remains open is out of the goodness of the owner to provide a place for frustrated hunters to vent or be entertained.  This site is not a social program, it's here to provide some value to the owner.  Always. 

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on May 27, 2016, 11:36:37 AM
I tell you what, if it wasn't for the good folks in the "BF" thread I probably wouldn't visit here as much. Sure, it started as serious as possible and it then took a life of its own. It's entertaining and there are still times when it does have some serious stories brought in but I don't see why anybody would want it deleted because they don't like it?

I'm not on here whining and crying about other threads that I deem as useless such as this one and countless others. Everybody has their opinions, thoughts, priorities and concerns so let them have them. There is an ignore button. :tup:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on May 27, 2016, 11:38:05 AM
 :yeah:  Plat.   :tup:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on May 27, 2016, 12:34:28 PM
This thread has been all fun and games until now. But the instant you bad mouthed the Big Foot thread you went too far.

 >:(
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: DaveMonti on May 27, 2016, 12:50:50 PM
I'm preparing myself for being banned for stating that I don't find any value in the Bigfoot thread. 
Have a nice weekend folks.  I hope it isn't a 30 day ban.  I'll lose touch with all the exciting new developments in the Bullwinkle case. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: h20hunter on May 27, 2016, 12:56:34 PM
Then ice for sure. Have a great weekend Dave!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: coachcw on May 27, 2016, 12:59:12 PM
So I understand everyone should know the boundary's and rules to the unit your hunting , I understand the game reg booklet is only a abbreviation of the laws . But If you call and ask a question and get a answer it should be viable . I'm not saying this hunter wasn't trying to get a yes when they should have known the rules pertaining to this hunt . Through the grape vine the story I got was a person from the dept did not tell him he could kill a bull but that's all hearsay . there should be a quick q and a section on the web that we could get answers quickly and print them off . I have passed animals before   just because  I wasn't sure . better safe than this mess .
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: coachcw on May 27, 2016, 12:59:52 PM
Get out and do some tree knocking !
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: b0bbyg on May 27, 2016, 01:03:38 PM
Number of pictures I have seen of Bullwinkle   0
Number of pictures I have seen of Bigfoot       0

So far I rate both threads equal.   Neither has pictures so I choose not to believe   :chuckle: :chuckle:


Now if we are talking the animated Bullwinkle of my youth, Big fan  :)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on May 27, 2016, 01:35:10 PM
You're not looking hard enough if you haven't seen pics of Bullwinkle or Bigfoot.  :twocents:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: h20hunter on May 27, 2016, 01:43:18 PM
Just google bull Winkle elk....first one that comes up is from the yak Herald.  He's laying in a frosty field just chilling out.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: b0bbyg on May 27, 2016, 01:56:23 PM
You're not looking hard enough if you haven't seen pics of Bullwinkle or Bigfoot.  :twocents:

Guilty as charged!     Just seems wrong for an elk to be called Bullwinkle

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on May 27, 2016, 02:16:23 PM
Number of pictures I have seen of Bullwinkle   0
Number of pictures I have seen of Bigfoot       0

So far I rate both threads equal.   Neither has pictures so I choose not to believe   :chuckle: :chuckle:


Now if we are talking the animated Bullwinkle of my youth, Big fan  :)

Last one is his auction tag bull.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on May 27, 2016, 02:35:18 PM
Pretty sure I see a Big Foot in the 3rd pic!!!!      :yike:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnfmly on May 27, 2016, 02:45:43 PM
did I read a couple Pages back that the bull was disabled and had a sticker on it  :-)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on May 27, 2016, 02:59:16 PM
You're not looking hard enough if you haven't seen pics of Bullwinkle or Bigfoot.  :twocents:

 :yeah: >:( 

This useless thread needs to be locked before I started finger pointing and name calling :tung:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: DaveMonti on May 27, 2016, 08:35:20 PM
Wait, Bigfoot killed the bull???  This is becoming crazypants. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 27, 2016, 08:38:14 PM
To set the record straight:  The earlier thread was dormant for weeks, and I was perfectly content to leave it alone, until Cboom called me out, not once but twice.  Then he proceeded to post the most outrageous libel about another member who dared to cite fact. 

This individual was doing all he could to get the thread locked down, and then he was given the heave ho for a month. 

There was a time when certain individuals posting here disputed facts that neither side was contesting.  It now appears that they have given up on that tack.

If this bull had been dropped in his tracks, loaded into the bed of a pickup and then spirited out of GMU 334 leaving no trace and if there were no independent witnesses... then it might have "ended well."

If the only thing the locals knew was that the bull was shot, but they had no idea that he had not wandered (or been driven) up north into a legal branch antlered GMU, they would have missed him, but "no harm, no foul," and it might have "ended well." 

If certain participant(s) had not been "kicking sand in the face," by posting on facebook and bragging up the act in the favored watering holes of local hunters, who would have liked a shot at that bull if it were ever possible to catch him up north, then they too might not have "gone ballistic" when it came out that the bull had been killed well within GMU 334, then it might have "ended well."

But none of those conditions were realized.  None of those conditions were likely to materialize either.  I just don't recognize a scenario in which, from the very start, this "ended well."

I have been on the receiving end of more than my share of SNide remARKs, SNARK, and have responded with snark of my own.  But never have I done so without provocation. 

If I wanted to I could have responded to those who tried to set up a tenable case for taking this elk by referencing the well intentioned, but failed, attempt to implement non lethal means to deal with another bull elk by saying that if the WDFW had thought fast they could have propped up the dead carcass of the elk that died in that incident in the middle of a hay meadow.  Sold an Auction Tag to someone with money to burn and allowed them to put a patched roundball into that animal and tag a trophy that has as much trophy value associated with it as does this animal, give or take 75 points.   And that money would have gone to support elk habitat and conservation efforts too. But I did not. 

Even though, try as they might, I don't think anyone could ever get me to recognize one as a superior hunting trophy over the other.  If you accept that any mature bull of this class, taken in a fair chase hunt is a hunting trophy, I could have made a compelling case that there is greater equivalence in value of both as a hunting trophy than there is distinction.

What I am getting at is that I have a friend who functions as a "clearing house" for what is going on in the Kittitas Valley and what I have posted re: the who, what, when and where has been validated.  Not that I needed independent validation to have confidence in what I posted with regards to the facts. 

Just by coincidence the individual who others have said "dropped the green flag" happens to be a good friend of mine's brother and that lead me to post an opinion of skepticism.  I have also posted that it is my understanding that no one has authority to authorize what is being offered as a mitigating factor. 

And I have been attacked.  I have been subjected to mockery, I have been subjected to insult and character assassination.

Over and over I have stated that I do not know Mr Reichert, but I know of Mr Reichert.  I gave a rundown of what I know and what I recall of the earlier incident and have made a distinction between what I posted as fact and what I recalled. 

I have made it clear that:  To the best of my knowledge Mr Reichert has an excellent reputation in his community and that I think this was an oversight on his part, he used poor judgement if you will, but made it a point to say that that does not mean that I see Mr Reichert as a bad man.   

I have looked for an explanation that explains why Mr Reichert would put himself in a position of being within a mile of being in such a mess and have explored every thing that I could come up with.  I have shared my thoughts on that subject.

Like it or not, Obsessive Compulsive Disorder, is a logical explanation.  I think we can all recognize and accept Mr Reichert's passion is elk and elk hunting in particular. 

I see the most logical explanation as Mr Reichert being oblivious to the potential risks involved.  I ask myself why?  Well Mr Reichert runs a large business and this could be explained as simple negligence.  Mr Reichert could have naively accepted what he was told by his hunting consultant and not fact checked it.  That implies poor judgement when it is you who is ultimately responsible to check, and double check.  Does it not? 

But given how well known this animal was and the likelihood that this would not end well even if legal, I also recognize that he may have a problem that seriously complicates him using sound judgement.  That would explain the recklessness of a man with a history targeting this particular bull given the fact that even if legal, killing it would not reflect well on him and maybe on hunting in general.

And then I stated why I don't think that is "somewhere anyone wants to go" in their defense.

I am looking at the charge,  Unlawful Hunting of Big Game II and I am confident of what I know are facts.  I have also considered the mitigating circumstances that are being offered in defense and to be perfectly honest, I am skeptical that any supposed phone call went down as it is being portrayed here, and even if it did I am unfamiliar with anything what so ever in the law that gives anyone the notion that anyone had the authority to give the thumbs up. 

And on top of every legal aspect of the case, by early this year this was headed toward Mr Reichert being the recipient of the Dr Walter Palmer DDS Lifetime Achievement Award in the Patio Elk Category in the press.  Early on I didn't know Bullwinkle the elk from Cleopatra Queen of the Nile the elk.  But once I was made aware that that is what the story was being pursued as....  Hell, that puts a whole new spin on this. 

I was told that reporters were asking pointed questions and obviously wanting to develop a story of a tame elk, Bullwinkle, being assassinated in cold blood.  By a hunter.  Hey, I telegraphed that and deliberately and systematically laid out a case for self reporting citing an oversight or poor judgement and doing what politicians do by getting "in front" of the story and thereby retaining some ability to determine the narrative. 

Once it was apparent that Bullwinkle was where this was headed, if Steve Hormel had been on the ball, a Public Relations firm, and a good one, should have been in charge. 

It is a mess now, it is a hot mess and it is out there. 

I have taken a lot of criticism for posting this on "hunting sites."  OK, fine - but my intention is to put something out there that distances hunters, and especially trophy hunters" from what went down here.  And if you look at what has been posted.... you do the math.  Reporters have work hard to find a quote that does not distance hunters from this act. 

 

       

 

 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jmscon on May 27, 2016, 08:39:30 PM
Now I'm confused, the pics are not of the same bull?!!? The last pic has an atypical tin, a big one at that!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 27, 2016, 08:42:48 PM
Italics not mine up thread!!  Tried to correct, but not happening. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Mfowl on May 27, 2016, 08:47:12 PM
Now I'm confused, the pics are not of the same bull?!!? The last pic has an atypical tin, a big one at that!

The last pic is a different bull from a different auction tag.

Keep fighting the good fight JD!  :tup:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on May 27, 2016, 09:00:35 PM
Now I'm confused, the pics are not of the same bull?!!? The last pic has an atypical tin, a big one at that!

Read the text in the post. ;)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jmscon on May 27, 2016, 09:03:24 PM
Just saw that, thank you!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kentrek on May 27, 2016, 09:49:22 PM
JD....how does degrading the animal help your case ?

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: emac on May 27, 2016, 09:55:09 PM
Now I'm confused, the pics are not of the same bull?!!? The last pic has an atypical tin, a big one at that!

Read the text in the post. ;)


The photos make it even more clear that this individual was not in any way going to ever show up in the field as a fair chase trophy elk. 

He is what he lived his life out as, a steer with bigger than normal elk antlers. 

This guy never fought for anything, much less keeping a nimrod from putting a bullet into his ribs. 

He lucked out when he was a spike.  There is no more glory in killing him with a muzzle loader that there is in holding the bolt gun in a feed bolt operation. 

No one goes home after converting a steer into tomorrow's offering at Whole Foods than they do when they send wieners off to Hormel.   For God's sake, let us put shooting a bull in a hay meadow into perspective. 

He never was a hunting trophy  and he never will be.  His place in Boone & Crocket holds no more significance than does a monster steer. 

He is, and never was going to be a "hunting trophy."
See this is where I finally have to disagree with you. I have followed this well before it even became a thread. And JD I have pretty much agreed with 99% of what you have said through all 3 threads.
But if this unit was open to branch antler bulls and was legal I would have no problem with how this hunt went down. Us as hunters can't dictate where the animals take up residency. We have to adapt to them. So if 334 was an open unit for branched antler bulls I wouldn't question this hunt. And if it was open to branched antler bulls we wouldn't even be having this conversation because someone would have shoot him before. My thought is if it is legal then it's good. It might not be the hunting style of some but each to their own. What if he was on the other side of the canal in a hayfield in an open unit and still a pet like he was would there still be the outrage...no there wouldn't. There would be some cause that is not some hunters cup of tea but still legal. The only 2 things that should matter in this case are the known is that it was shot in a closed unit and the unknown if the Wdfw gave him permission to shoot it or not. In my opinion those are the only two points that matter in this case. We know one is a fact and the second we don't know.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: KFhunter on May 27, 2016, 10:21:17 PM

.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on May 27, 2016, 10:25:22 PM
I'm a little late to the game but wasn't this a high fence hunt?

 No
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: KFhunter on May 27, 2016, 10:33:54 PM
I'm a little late to the game but wasn't this a high fence hunt?

 No

OK different bull then. 

Coulda swore I've seen that image somewhere and was trying to place it.  I read a thread here a few years back with a bull on a road like that and it was a high fence hunt.   
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 27, 2016, 10:39:52 PM
JD....how does degrading the animal help your case ?

How would attaching a hunter's name to taking this animal enhance Todd Reichert's standing as an elk hunter?  That is the question that I am trying to get my mind around.

But to answer your question, this guy never has ever been a fair chase elk.  He has been a plug since the day he was born.  He has always been as tame as a 4H steer and he has never been a fair chase trophy. His value, as such, as a trophy, is not incumbent on his genetics and his ability to evade other hunters for five years.  In fact if he was a fair chase elk he would have been in someone's freezer and this whole sad story would have ended there.  He is not a trophy elk he is an elk with exceptional genetics who would never have gotten to the point that he was recognized as anything but a stupid elk six years ago if GMU 334 was open, for any reason what so ever, to taking branch antlered bulls. 

Now, if his life circumstances were different, and he lived a life of....  By God, this elk among elk has evaded all comers and you finally outsmarted, or gone deeper into the wilderness, and "got er' done"  He is a then a hunting trophy.

Oh, he is a stud, when it comes to his antlers, but is he an elk stud?  Nope, he was a pug.

He's just a big ol' dummy that was thinking that the guy with a borrowed muzzle loader is bringing him another apple.   

But again, I digress.  Killing any branch antlered elk in GMU 334 constitutes Unlawful Hunting Big Game II.  And I say "hunting" because that is what the law says, and, unfortunately Boone & Crockett allows this as as 'fair chase." 

This was no more "fair chase hunting" than my offering to wrestle my mother would in me being recognized as my being a studly man.   

Lay out a scenario in which this could not have reflected ill on Todd Reichert and I will concede that Todd Reichert was not using poor judgement. 

I submit for consideration that Todd Reichert  just didn't give a tinker's damn, or that Todd Reichert said "the hell with the torpedoes, full speed ahead: I have Steve Hormel on retainer" and my shyster has already proven that he is more than a match for any legal issue that result.    I want another 400 plus elk as a feather in my head dress.   

Is he nuts, maybe.  But maybe he deliberately and systematically conspired to set up a scenario, or maybe he was just naive.  But my instincts say poor judgement.  And if a guy that has a shoot through and kills a second elk can live with that....  you do the math.   
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on May 27, 2016, 10:41:39 PM
I'm a little late to the game but wasn't this a high fence hunt?

 No

OK different bull then. 

Coulda swore I've seen that image somewhere and was trying to place it.  I read a thread here a few years back with a bull on a road like that and it was a high fence hunt.   

 Legit hunt (auction tag) legit bull! :tup:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 27, 2016, 10:54:54 PM
Now I'm confused, the pics are not of the same bull?!!? The last pic has an atypical tin, a big one at that!

The last pic is a different bull from a different auction tag.

Keep fighting the good fight JD!  :tup:

What I post as truth are now validated.  What I said was coming has given me confidence that my intuitions were correct.  I am still skeptical that there exculpatory evidence.  But any "fight" I had is over.  The evidence will decide guilt or innocence.  I am skeptical of any exculpatory evidence, but it is that will decide guilt or innocence, if this goes to trial, and I have said such all along:  If there is probable cause then I encourage vigorous prosecution.  Charges filed implies probable cause, let's give me reason to not acquit before you commit me to a certain outcome.  Please.

Up to this point I am satisfied that justice has been done.  I am skeptical, but my mind is open to whether there was permission given.   That being said:  Knowing what I know, legalities aside, this simply was not going to end well.   
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kentrek on May 28, 2016, 12:18:55 AM
The ol bull was smart enough to stay in an area not many hunt...same logic as any of the old bulls I've ever killed...distance into the wilderness is irrelevant to how awesome a particular animal is....this was a impressive critter...maybe not by a measure of evasiveness,as he knew he was safe... but The bull lived to a pretty decent age...

Its a impressive animal

The hunt not so much
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on May 28, 2016, 12:24:30 AM
Now I'm confused, the pics are not of the same bull?!!? The last pic has an atypical tin, a big one at that!

The last pic is a different bull from a different auction tag.

Keep fighting the good fight JD!  :tup:

What I post as truth are now validated.  What I said was coming has given me confidence that my intuitions were correct.  I am still skeptical that there exculpatory evidence.  But any "fight" I had is over.  The evidence will decide guilt or innocence.  I am skeptical of any exculpatory evidence, but it is that will decide guilt or innocence, if this goes to trial, and I have said such all along:  If there is probable cause then I encourage vigorous prosecution.  Charges filed implies probable cause, let's give me reason to not acquit before you commit me to a certain outcome.  Please.

Up to this point I am satisfied that justice has been done.  I am skeptical, but my mind is open to whether there was permission given.   That being said:  Knowing what I know, legalities aside, this simply was not going to end well.   

Then why not let the cards fall where they may?  Why keep harassing and repeating yourself?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 28, 2016, 05:36:54 AM
Now I'm confused, the pics are not of the same bull?!!? The last pic has an atypical tin, a big one at that!

The last pic is a different bull from a different auction tag.

Keep fighting the good fight JD!  :tup:

What I post as truth are now validated.  What I said was coming has given me confidence that my intuitions were correct.  I am still skeptical that there exculpatory evidence.  But any "fight" I had is over.  The evidence will decide guilt or innocence.  I am skeptical of any exculpatory evidence, but it is that will decide guilt or innocence, if this goes to trial, and I have said such all along:  If there is probable cause then I encourage vigorous prosecution.  Charges filed implies probable cause, let's give me reason to not acquit before you commit me to a certain outcome.  Please.

Up to this point I am satisfied that justice has been done.  I am skeptical, but my mind is open to whether there was permission given.   That being said:  Knowing what I know, legalities aside, this simply was not going to end well.   

Then why not let the cards fall where they may?  Why keep harassing and repeating yourself?

I stopped by the gun club after work yesterday just to take a shot or two with a rifle that the scope had come loose on and was asked about what I have posted and ended up chatting with two guys I know about this and was on my mind when I got home. 

The discussion we had revolved around how none of us could fathom how anybody could see a scenario in which killing this elk was worth the risk of potential, actually near certainty of eventual, negative consequences.

You do have a point though. 
 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 724wd on May 28, 2016, 08:14:49 AM
I'm with you right up until this last bit, JD.  It's not always about how steep and deep you go for an animal.  What makes a trophy for you could be vastly different for me.  One of my favorite deer was shot just 30 yards from my dad's house.  I waited less than 8 minutes for it to come into the pasture.  It was the absolute easiest hunt I've even done.  Why is it my favorite?  because it was the first time my daughter was with me when i killed a deer.  We'd hunted a lot but never killed a deer until that day.  She was 5.  it was a reward of sorts, for her spending the whole previous year in the blind and still hunting with me with no success.  He was just a little velvet 3 point, but he's a trophy to me and my daughter.  His antlers are above her bed as we speak. 

So the ease of the hunt is not the issue I have with this scenario.  The man shot the animal in a closed unit.  End of story.  He should face the same punishment any of us would had we done the same thing.  How comfortable the elk was has no bearing on the case for me, only that Mr. Reichert broke the law, and likely willfully!  THAT'S why it upsets me.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on May 28, 2016, 08:22:19 AM
Now I'm confused, the pics are not of the same bull?!!? The last pic has an atypical tin, a big one at that!

Read the text in the post. ;)


The photos make it even more clear that this individual was not in any way going to ever show up in the field as a fair chase trophy elk. 

He is what he lived his life out as, a steer with bigger than normal elk antlers. 

This guy never fought for anything, much less keeping a nimrod from putting a bullet into his ribs. 

He lucked out when he was a spike.  There is no more glory in killing him with a muzzle loader that there is in holding the bolt gun in a feed bolt operation. 

No one goes home after converting a steer into tomorrow's offering at Whole Foods than they do when they send wieners off to Hormel.   For God's sake, let us put shooting a bull in a hay meadow into perspective. 

He never was a hunting trophy  and he never will be.  His place in Boone & Crocket holds no more significance than does a monster steer. 

He is, and never was going to be a "hunting trophy." 

The point I am trying to make, although I admit, clumsily, is that so log as B&C and others recognize a "steer with  big elk antlers," there will be a population that wants to be recognized as a "hunter among hunters" who took it as a personal challenge.... when it was nothing of the sort. 

What to do?  I really don't care, one mature bull is no more significant than another mature herd bull, in my esteem.  What matters is the effort and dedication.  I know the what criteria I use to evaluate a hunter/trophy.  But that is a pretty subjective measure and while it works for me... there will always be those who idolize a hunter by how big in inches of horn. 

But I digress, what ever gave anybody the notion that this would end well?  By that I mean provide any value to a hunting career that was worth the risk of throwing every thing that went before that was of value away.

So that isnt and won't ever be a trophy,  but the other field/front yard bull killed with bait nearby is a trophy?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on May 28, 2016, 08:47:31 AM
Here is the bull I was referring to.




(photo removed at owner request)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bullkllr on May 28, 2016, 08:57:17 AM
Whether it's a "trophy" or not is purely an opinion and I do not see how it matters.

Legality, on the other hand, should be based on the facts and imo does matter.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bearpaw on May 28, 2016, 09:59:42 AM
I personally don't see any value of keeping this open.  The same people keep repeating the same "facts", same theories as to why this happened, theories on what was going through peoples minds, and even speculating on the mental health of the folks involved. 

However, money is to be made by internet page views, and this topic, along with other useless threads like "Bigfoot", "Word Association Game" and "Chain Reaction Game", all generate consistent numbers of views, and money.  I can't blame anyone for keeping them going, despite their uselessness. 



I normally agree with you on most everything, Dave...but I gotta disagree on this one. I don't see a problem with a few threads where folks are having a good time and not starting trouble or endlessly complaining about things. The last 3 threads you mentioned are the ones I'm referring to. This isn't exactly a cash cow for anyone. What I mean by that is I'm pretty sure this forum barely makes enough money as it stands for Dale to not have to pay out of pocket to keep it up and running.


I'm quite sure that nobody is getting rich off of this site, but the truth is that these threads do generate clicks, views, and responses that at least help the site break even financially.  I don't blame anyone at all.  I personally don't look at the three threads I mentioned after I checked them out for the first time.  Sure, people are having fun, but I personally don't see any value or entertainment in the three threads I mentioned. 

As far as this topic, there have been LOTS of warnings (certainly more than a dozen), no real useful dialogue, and a few other threads shut down due to the risk of lawsuits.  Why keep this one alive?  It's been beaten to death, is riskier than other topics, and probably takes a LOT of time to moderate, with nothing of value coming out of it.

Why keep it alive despite all this?  The reason is simple, it helps to generate income for the site, and I don't blame anyone for that.  Without 70+ pages, thousands of views, the site may be losing money instead of breaking even.  Things always get down to money, and when the risk of losing money through legal action becomes greater than the benefit of clicks, this thread will be shut down and another one started.  That's business.  I can't believe that the reason this thread remains open is out of the goodness of the owner to provide a place for frustrated hunters to vent or be entertained.  This site is not a social program, it's here to provide some value to the owner.  Always.

DaveMonti if the sole purpose of this forum was to make money you would see all kinds of irrelevent advertising plus advertising between comments like you see on many other forums. I am propositioned monthly and sometimes weekly by ad agencies who want to clutter this forum with junk advertising. Perhaps I am foolish, but I have chosen to keep this forum different than those others. For the most part advertising and donations pay the bills and allows us to award prizes in the various contests. Many members enjoy the contests, if you do not like the contests then put the "Contests" board on "Ignore" here: http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php?action=profile;area=ignoreboards

The goal for this forum is to be as quoted from the front page "A Pacific Northwest Hunting and Outdoors Resource Site". If we remove topics that hunters wish to talk about then we aren't fulfilling that goal. We do try to keep it family friendly so that the site is viewable by youth as well, it is important that we encourage youth participation in our sport and that can start on the internet.

Occasionally this forum (an internet service provider) is threatened with a lawsuit due to comments made by members (individual publishers). In most cases we suggest that the person who feels they have been slandered take up the issue with the person who published the claimed slanderous material. On occasion when requested H-W has removed potentially slanderous comments and/or topics. Courts have ruled that generally ISP's are not responsible for content submitted by publishers. It should be noted that if comments are untruthful and damages can be proven to the court, the court may award compensation to the damaged party, therefore, it is advised that members only publish factual comments.

Despite our requests to keep comments factual in previous topics regarding this issue, those topics contained so many questionable comments that the entire topics were eventually removed due to the threat of legal action. This topic is based on a published newspaper story, to my knowledge there is no reason to remove this topic, but questionable comments brought to our attention may be removed.

This topic has resulted in another version of the story being presented, there are always at least two sides to every story. Now it appears questionable if some previous claims were true? People's reputations could/may have been affected, it's only fair that all persons be allowed to tell their side of the story, the public should hear all sides of the story, and the truth should be known to all, therefore H-W will attempt to keep this topic available to the public.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 28, 2016, 11:22:49 AM
I'm with you right up until this last bit, JD.  It's not always about how steep and deep you go for an animal.  What makes a trophy for you could be vastly different for me.  One of my favorite deer was shot just 30 yards from my dad's house.  I waited less than 8 minutes for it to come into the pasture.  It was the absolute easiest hunt I've even done.  Why is it my favorite?  because it was the first time my daughter was with me when i killed a deer.  We'd hunted a lot but never killed a deer until that day.  She was 5.  it was a reward of sorts, for her spending the whole previous year in the blind and still hunting with me with no success.  He was just a little velvet 3 point, but he's a trophy to me and my daughter.  His antlers are above her bed as we speak. 

So the ease of the hunt is not the issue I have with this scenario.  The man shot the animal in a closed unit.  End of story.  He should face the same punishment any of us would had we done the same thing.  How comfortable the elk was has no bearing on the case for me, only that Mr. Reichert broke the law, and likely willfully!  THAT'S why it upsets me.

Ya' know something.  You are absolutely right.  I was more than a little aggravated at the name calling etc. and said what I said on that topic as a way of slapping back. 

I was wrong to have posted that.   
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: coachcw on May 28, 2016, 05:29:05 PM
Like Dale said two sides to every story , The shooter has had every opportunity to come on here and defend  his side ?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on May 28, 2016, 06:17:11 PM
Why would he want to?

Even if he's innocent, this crowd would be all over him.

There's no upside to him coming on here.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on May 28, 2016, 06:19:58 PM
And I don't know the guy from Adam, nor do I have any reliable 4th hand info.
Heck of a bull, though.   A true monster.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: CAMPMEAT on May 28, 2016, 07:33:13 PM
So many people on these types of forums, say that the hunters get a blackeye for killing a big bull, or whatever huge animal that was killed. To me, it's the very rich, thumbing their noses at everybody because the can.... It's not the hunters, in my mind, that get the blackeye. It's the rich who think they can buy anything and get away with it. I mean, why does the media even have to mention the guy is a multi-millionaire ? Just to get a rise out of the reading public. :twocents:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: M_ray on May 29, 2016, 10:20:01 AM

So that isnt and won't ever be a trophy,  but the other field/front yard bull killed with bait nearby is a trophy?

You keep making this argument but you are missing the entire point. The majority here take issue with the fact that your friends bull was taken in a closed unit and the one you keep referring to was legal ... its not hard to understand?  :dunno:

If you would like to discuss the ethics of whether or not guys would call an animal a trophy once shot in a field then start another thread  :twocents:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on May 29, 2016, 11:36:17 AM
His post was in response to JDHasty's long post about the Reichert bull being tame.

The other hunt seems similar from that perspective.

Personally, I think both bulls are trophy specimens for their species......   but neither rates very high on my fair chase meter.

But, legal is legal, and I won't condemn someone for picking up an easy animal as long as it's legal.
I know that I have picked up more than my fair share of easy animals but they aren't my true trophies.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Odell on May 29, 2016, 03:32:58 PM
To me Reichert's guilt or innocence is probably not as worrisome as what impact his taking of this bull (which by all accounts appears to have been a "pet", that had a name and that was fed regularly alfalfa hay in a fenced area by local kids) could have on legitimate hunters and hunting in general. Most of what I've read indicates this trophy was killed without any remote semblance of "fair chase" or any traditional notions of fair play or ethical hunting. So far, news of this episode has been kept fairly local and I'm hoping we don't end up with another "Cecil" incident once some anti-hunter individual or group uses social media to feign shock and outrage, which then spreads like wildfire and gets shared by others who chime in and paint all hunters as elitist and wealthy mass killers who care little for wildlife and animal rights.

 Well said.

I agree, it's also worrisome that some hunters themselves have made this such a big deal that it will harm hunters in the end.

It is a sad day when hunters who simply want the laws enforced are blamed for this mess. If we don't have rule of law we lose hunting altogether.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on May 29, 2016, 04:41:38 PM
To me Reichert's guilt or innocence is probably not as worrisome as what impact his taking of this bull (which by all accounts appears to have been a "pet", that had a name and that was fed regularly alfalfa hay in a fenced area by local kids) could have on legitimate hunters and hunting in general. Most of what I've read indicates this trophy was killed without any remote semblance of "fair chase" or any traditional notions of fair play or ethical hunting. So far, news of this episode has been kept fairly local and I'm hoping we don't end up with another "Cecil" incident once some anti-hunter individual or group uses social media to feign shock and outrage, which then spreads like wildfire and gets shared by others who chime in and paint all hunters as elitist and wealthy mass killers who care little for wildlife and animal rights.

 Well said.

I agree, it's also worrisome that some hunters themselves have made this such a big deal that it will harm hunters in the end.

It is a sad day when hunters who simply want the laws enforced are blamed for this mess. If we don't have rule of law we lose hunting altogether.

I suspect that just about all of us want the law enforced.

But, when hunters turn on hunters and don't let due process run it's course, I'd say that's also a sad day. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Alchase on May 29, 2016, 04:53:41 PM
No offense Dan'o but I have to disagree, there seems to be a few who are going out of their way to muddy this whole thing up. There is one "member" that was threatening lawsuits to other members and this forum to shut down the discussion.
So no, not all want the law to be enforced.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on May 29, 2016, 05:07:08 PM
No offense Dan'o but I have to disagree, there seems to be a few who are going out of their way to muddy this whole thing up. There is one "member" that was threatening lawsuits to other members and this forum to shut down the discussion.
So no, not all want the law to be enforced.

No offense taken.

That's why I said:   I suspect that just about all of us want the law enforced.     ;)

I just don't like seeing cases tried on the internet.   I've seen too many cases where a good person was smeared because someone had really solid 4th hand information.

*  I don't know this guy or anything about the hunt.  I have no dog in this hunt.
**  I am all for conducting legal hunts and prosecuting scofflaws.
***  if you're ever back in Kent, look me up.  18-26
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on May 29, 2016, 05:14:03 PM
No offense Dan'o but I have to disagree, there seems to be a few who are going out of their way to muddy this whole thing up. There is one "member" that was threatening lawsuits to other members and this forum to shut down the discussion.
So no, not all want the law to be enforced.

No offense taken.

I just don't like seeing cases tried on the internet.   I've seen too many cases where a good person was smeared because someone had really solid 4th hand information.

*  I don't know this guy or anything about the hunt.  I have no dog in this hunt.
**  I am all for conducting legal hunts and prosecuting scofflaws.
***  if you're ever back in Kent, look me up.  18-26

 Most of us are only concerned with the one indisputable fact, the bull was killed in a closed (as per state regulations) unit. ;)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on May 29, 2016, 05:26:49 PM
No offense Dan'o but I have to disagree, there seems to be a few who are going out of their way to muddy this whole thing up. There is one "member" that was threatening lawsuits to other members and this forum to shut down the discussion.
So no, not all want the law to be enforced.

No offense taken.

I just don't like seeing cases tried on the internet.   I've seen too many cases where a good person was smeared because someone had really solid 4th hand information.

*  I don't know this guy or anything about the hunt.  I have no dog in this hunt.
**  I am all for conducting legal hunts and prosecuting scofflaws.
***  if you're ever back in Kent, look me up.  18-26

 Most of us are only concerned with the one indisputable fact, the bull was killed in a closed (as per state regulations) unit. ;)

Understood......   and I hope that justice is served.   

But, I've seen other cases of good people on here that were falsely accused.   I think I even remember someone trying to call you out for some nonsense about not owning land that you were posting and trying to keep others off of (apple orchard incident).

Now, what little I know of you tells me that you're as honest and upstanding a guy as there is.   But that doesn't stop internet conjecture.

And while the one "indisputable fact" might be just that, if we weren't there it just seems dangerous to do internet sleuthery.

I have a lot of respect for some of the folks taking your exact position - you are one of them. 

I'd just rather it worked it's way through the actual court rather than the internet court of opinions......   but it may be just a tad late for that.     :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on May 29, 2016, 06:22:54 PM
No offense Dan'o but I have to disagree, there seems to be a few who are going out of their way to muddy this whole thing up. There is one "member" that was threatening lawsuits to other members and this forum to shut down the discussion.
So no, not all want the law to be enforced.

No offense taken.

I just don't like seeing cases tried on the internet.   I've seen too many cases where a good person was smeared because someone had really solid 4th hand information.

*  I don't know this guy or anything about the hunt.  I have no dog in this hunt.
**  I am all for conducting legal hunts and prosecuting scofflaws.
***  if you're ever back in Kent, look me up.  18-26

 Most of us are only concerned with the one indisputable fact, the bull was killed in a closed (as per state regulations) unit. ;)

Understood......   and I hope that justice is served.   

But, I've seen other cases of good people on here that were falsely accused.   I think I even remember someone trying to call you out for some nonsense about not owning land that you were posting and trying to keep others off of (apple orchard incident).

Now, what little I know of you tells me that you're as honest and upstanding a guy as there is.   But that doesn't stop internet conjecture.

And while the one "indisputable fact" might be just that, if we weren't there it just seems dangerous to do internet sleuthery.

I have a lot of respect for some of the folks taking your exact position - you are one of them. 

I'd just rather it worked it's way through the actual court rather than the internet court of opinions......   but it may be just a tad late for that.     :chuckle:

  :tup:

 Where the discussion will get interesting is after a verdict is reached. If he ends up getting permission from the state, there will be a lot of pissed off people speculating that the only reason is because of his "contributions", which although admirable, should not grant him exemptions to printed rules/laws that everyone else has been mandated to follow.

 It's certainly going to be a lesson one way or the other. ;)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: mfswallace on May 29, 2016, 07:58:47 PM
First court date on Tuesday, who's gonna be there and report back to us???
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on May 29, 2016, 08:09:09 PM
No offense Dan'o but I have to disagree, there seems to be a few who are going out of their way to muddy this whole thing up. There is one "member" that was threatening lawsuits to other members and this forum to shut down the discussion.
So no, not all want the law to be enforced.

No offense taken.

I just don't like seeing cases tried on the internet.   I've seen too many cases where a good person was smeared because someone had really solid 4th hand information.

*  I don't know this guy or anything about the hunt.  I have no dog in this hunt.
**  I am all for conducting legal hunts and prosecuting scofflaws.
***  if you're ever back in Kent, look me up.  18-26

 Most of us are only concerned with the one indisputable fact, the bull was killed in a closed (as per state regulations) unit. ;)

Understood......   and I hope that justice is served.   

But, I've seen other cases of good people on here that were falsely accused.   I think I even remember someone trying to call you out for some nonsense about not owning land that you were posting and trying to keep others off of (apple orchard incident).

Now, what little I know of you tells me that you're as honest and upstanding a guy as there is.   But that doesn't stop internet conjecture.

And while the one "indisputable fact" might be just that, if we weren't there it just seems dangerous to do internet sleuthery.

I have a lot of respect for some of the folks taking your exact position - you are one of them. 

I'd just rather it worked it's way through the actual court rather than the internet court of opinions......   but it may be just a tad late for that.     :chuckle:

  :tup:

 Where the discussion will get interesting is after a verdict is reached. If he ends up getting permission from the state, there will be a lot of pissed off people speculating that the only reason is because of his "contributions", which although admirable, should not grant him exemptions to printed rules/laws that everyone else has been mandated to follow.

 It's certainly going to be a lesson one way or the other. ;)

100% agree.

I am still naive enough to believe in the system, but my faith continues to get shaken almost daily these days....
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on May 30, 2016, 12:14:59 AM
His post was in response to JDHasty's long post about the Reichert bull being tame.

The other hunt seems similar from that perspective.

Personally, I think both bulls are trophy specimens for their species......   but neither rates very high on my fair chase meter.

But, legal is legal, and I won't condemn someone for picking up an easy animal as long as it's legal.
I know that I have picked up more than my fair share of easy animals but they aren't my true trophies.

I was wrong to post what I did re: the "trophy value."  It does not belong in the discussion re: the legality of this hunt. 

What matters is the legality.   

Let's just say WDFW wanted this bull lethally removed?  Would letting a South Central Big Game Tag Holder be a legal way to accomplish that end?

No, nO, and NO!!! And WDFW knows this as a stone cold natural fact.  The reason we got to this point is due to abuses that have occurred in the past with big bulls like this one. 

If I were looking at this from a purely pragmatic standpoint... Mr Reichert's taking of this bull left another legal bull for others to chase.  So that could make someone else really happy. 

But the laws must be applied equally.  This bull was lusted after by many, but since he never wandered during hunting season....  He simply lived in a no branch antler elk hunting GMU and as such nobody was remotely likely to get a chance at him.  Many tried to drive him up north and failed. 

You cannot look at the restrictions placed on that hunt and the Controlling Legal Authority, The Game Regs, and say that putting that restriction in place was done without deliberation.

They are not there for no reason.  They are there to point  out that bulls like this one that live a charmed life in a no elk hunting or no branch antler elk hunting area, and there are others like him, are not part of the bargain should you win the draw. 

That South Central Big Game Tag has very few restrictions placed on it that do not apply across the board to all hunters and those restrictions are explicitly and unambiguously spelled out in the Game Regs. 

If it is OK for WDFW to make an exception for the South Central Big Game Raffle Tag, that means it would have been OK for WDFW to make an exception for any other hunter.  It would mean that if the consideration was that taking this big bull would leave another totally legal for someone else then...  WTH does it matter if Todd Reichert took it or someone else took it using an eastside any Elk Tag?

WDFW simply cannot, and would not, IMHO make an exception, particularly on a high visibility bull like this.   

So that leaves us with WDFW making an interpretation on the SCBGRT bull elk tag that says it is valid in GMU 334 which flat out contradicts what is published in the Game Regs.

Let's say JDHasty made a call.  No Mr Hasty, read your Game Regs and it says that GMU is never open for branch antler bulls. 

But then let's say Mr Reichert's hunting consultant made that call.... Given what is clearly stated as the restrictions on that tag.  Let's just say:  I think the response would not be so polite.               
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on May 30, 2016, 01:44:13 AM
Here is the bull I was referring to.




(photo removed at owner request)

Not sure why the pic was deleted?  It says it was by owner request?  This is a pic that is available on the internet in many places.  By posting it no rules of this forum were broken.  This is just another tame front yard bull, and in this case  bait was used. So l once again here is the pic.

If this gets removed again please provide a legitimate reason for doing so. Not a single one of your rules was broken the first time I posted it or this time.

( photo removed at request of owner )
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: emac on May 30, 2016, 05:05:27 AM
Kiticaashunter why do you and all the other people defending TR continually keep bringing this hunt up and comparing the two. There is one big difference this bull was killed in a LEGAL unit. Let me say that again it was killed in a LEGAL unit. This bull was not shoot over bait, but if it would have been it still would have been LEGAL. How many other hunters had tried to get this bull through the years and have been unsuccessful.  There were numerous tags available for branched antler bulls in this open and LEGAL unit.
Oh wait I know why you guys keep bringing it up. You wanna try to deflect away from the issue being discussed. You guys aren't happy that someone else got this particular bull because Todd really wanted to get this bull as he hunted it in the prior weeks and had planned to go back after it with the auction tag.
So quit trying to compare these hunts. One was in a LEGAL and open hunting unit and one was in a closed hunting unit to branched antler bulls which equals not LEGAL.
If 334 was an open unit to branched antler bulls and Todd shoot the bull he did I could of cared less as probably 90% of the other people commenting on this thread

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: TVHunts on May 30, 2016, 06:00:37 AM
Kiticaashunter why do you and all the other people defending TR continually keep bringing this hunt up and comparing the two. There is one big difference this bull was killed in a LEGAL unit. Let me say that again it was killed in a LEGAL unit. This bull was not shoot over bait, but if it would have been it still would have been LEGAL. How many other hunters had tried to get this bull through the years and have been unsuccessful.  There were numerous tags available for branched antler bulls in this open and LEGAL unit.
Oh wait I know why you guys keep bringing it up. You wanna try to deflect away from the issue being discussed. You guys aren't happy that someone else got this particular bull because Todd really wanted to get this bull as he hunted it in the prior weeks and had planned to go back after it with the auction tag.
So quit trying to compare these hunts. One was in a LEGAL and open hunting unit and one was in a closed hunting unit to branched antler bulls which equals not LEGAL.
If 334 was an open unit to branched antler bulls and Todd shoot the bull he did I could of cared less as probably 90% of the other people commenting on this thread

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

Assuming eMac's story is true there is absolutely no comparison between the two situations. 

Also, the Bullwinkle bull would take food from the hand allegedly. He was allegedly in a farmers field when shot where I am guessing there was ample food.  Seems a lot like the pot calling the kettle black on the shooting the elk over bait comparison. And again, in a LEGAL hunting unit, allegedly.  (Trying to keep the defamation lawsuit target off my back) :peep:

I'm not so sure the owner of the forum nor the moderators owe you an explanation for removing the photo though.  I am guessing that reposting it will get you that response  :hello:

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on May 30, 2016, 08:48:05 AM
Here is the bull I was referring to.




(photo removed at owner request)

Not sure why the pic was deleted?  It says it was by owner request?  This is a pic that is available on the internet in many places.  By posting it no rules of this forum were broken.  This is just another tame front yard bull, and in this case  bait was used. So l once again here is the pic.

If this gets removed again please provide a legitimate reason for doing so. Not a single one of your rules was broken the first time I posted it or this time.


This bull is not relevant  to the thread and as stated the owner requested it's removal .  No other explanation needed, please do not post a 3rd time.


Relevancy is a matter of opinion. I think there is alot that can be compared in th e two. And I guess you don't need to give me another reason for its removal. The other pics stay up even as the author was asked to remove them? I guess the owner can make his own choices on this. Discrimination is a nasty and illegal thing, and this thread has touched or crossed that line.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: emac on May 30, 2016, 09:07:48 AM
Here is the bull I was referring to.




(photo removed at owner request)

Not sure why the pic was deleted?  It says it was by owner request?  This is a pic that is available on the internet in many places.  By posting it no rules of this forum were broken.  This is just another tame front yard bull, and in this case  bait was used. So l once again here is the pic.

If this gets removed again please provide a legitimate reason for doing so. Not a single one of your rules was broken the first time I posted it or this time.


This bull is not relevant  to the thread and as stated the owner requested it's removal .  No other explanation needed, please do not post a 3rd time.


Relevancy is a matter of opinion. I think there is alot that can be compared in th e two. And I guess you don't need to give me another reason for its removal. The other pics stay up even as the author was asked to remove them? I guess the owner can make his own choices on this. Discrimination is a nasty and illegal thing, and this thread has touched or crossed that line.
How are they relevant? Here are the facts.
1. One bull was shot in a gmu you that is not opened to branched antler bulls. The other bull was shot in a unit that there were 54 branched antler bull tags given out last year.
2. One bull was under investigation of the Wdfw and the other one never had any investigation.
3. One bull investigation was sent to the prosecutors office and charges were filled the other bull was never investigated.
4. The person who shot one bull has a court date and the other bull was still never investigated.

So the me again how they are relevant. As I stated before is the bull was shot in an open gmu there wouldn't of been 3 threads on this and nobody would of cared

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on May 30, 2016, 09:18:01 AM
Here is the bull I was referring to.




(photo removed at owner request)

Not sure why the pic was deleted?  It says it was by owner request?  This is a pic that is available on the internet in many places.  By posting it no rules of this forum were broken.  This is just another tame front yard bull, and in this case  bait was used. So l once again here is the pic.

If this gets removed again please provide a legitimate reason for doing so. Not a single one of your rules was broken the first time I posted it or this time.


This bull is not relevant  to the thread and as stated the owner requested it's removal .  No other explanation needed, please do not post a 3rd time.


Relevancy is a matter of opinion. I think there is alot that can be compared in th e two. And I guess you don't need to give me another reason for its removal. The other pics stay up even as the author was asked to remove them? I guess the owner can make his own choices on this. Discrimination is a nasty and illegal thing, and this thread has touched or crossed that line.
How are they relevant? Here are the facts.
1. One bull was shot in a gmu you that is not opened to branched antler bulls. The other bull was shot in a unit that there were 54 branched antler bull tags given out last year.
2. One bull was under investigation of the Wdfw and the other one never had any investigation.
3. One bull investigation was sent to the prosecutors office and charges were filled the other bull was never investigated.
4. The person who shot one bull has a court date and the other bull was still never investigated.

So the me again how they are relevant. As I stated before is the bull was shot in an open gmu there wouldn't of been 3 threads on this and nobody would of cared

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

They are relevant in the way that many on herd have claimed shooting the one bull in the field was not hunting. Yet this other tame bull gets killed in a even less sporting fashion and nobody cares.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: h20hunter on May 30, 2016, 09:23:01 AM
It was a legal hunt with no legal issues pending . The owner asked that it not be posted .  They have the right to ask  this and any other website where it is posted .  We respected that request and will continue  to do do. You are the only one making the comparison  and frankly  it is childish and tiresome . 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on May 30, 2016, 09:29:31 AM
It was a legal hunt with no legal issues pending . The owner asked that it not be posted .  They have the right to ask  this and any other website where it is posted .  We respected that request and will continue  to do do. You are the only one making the comparison  and frankly  it is childish and tiresome .

I have kept my posts within the forum rules and will continue to.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: h20hunter on May 30, 2016, 10:25:42 AM
I have again been asked by the owner to have the pic of their bull removed. I'd like to pay attention to my ribs in the smoker, not removing pis already removed for reasons that don't need repeating.  Do not repost.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bearpaw on May 30, 2016, 10:34:33 AM
Here is the bull I was referring to.




(photo removed at owner request)

Not sure why the pic was deleted?  It says it was by owner request?  This is a pic that is available on the internet in many places.  By posting it no rules of this forum were broken.  This is just another tame front yard bull, and in this case  bait was used. So l once again here is the pic.

If this gets removed again please provide a legitimate reason for doing so. Not a single one of your rules was broken the first time I posted it or this time.

( photo removed at request of owner )

You messaged me and I explained that the photo was removed at the owners request. I informed you that I have no idea who you are so your requests to remove Reichert's photos have no bearing. If you are a friend of Todd Reichert's please let him that I invited him to join the forum and tell his side of the story. I also provided you with my email and phone number so Mr Reichert can request removal of his photos if he chooses not to join the forum. I have made it abundantly clear that I am neutral on this issue and believe a person is innocent until proven guilty. If Todd Reichert sees any particular post that contains untruthful information tell him to let me know and it will be removed.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bearpaw on May 30, 2016, 10:38:41 AM
Here is the bull I was referring to.




(photo removed at owner request)

Not sure why the pic was deleted?  It says it was by owner request?  This is a pic that is available on the internet in many places.  By posting it no rules of this forum were broken.  This is just another tame front yard bull, and in this case  bait was used. So l once again here is the pic.

If this gets removed again please provide a legitimate reason for doing so. Not a single one of your rules was broken the first time I posted it or this time.

( photo removed at request of owner )

You messaged me and I explained that the photo was removed at the owners request. I informed you that I have no idea who you are so your requests to remove Reichert's photos have no bearing. If you are a friend of Todd Reichert's please let him that I invited him to join the forum and tell his side of the story. I also provided you with my email and phone number so Mr Reichert can request removal of his photos if he chooses not to join the forum. I have made it abundantly clear that I am neutral on this issue and believe a person is innocent until proven guilty. If Todd Reichert sees any particular post that contains untruthful information tell him to let me know and it will be removed.

I don't visit many other forums and do not know what photos are in the public domain and can be used without owner permission. The owner requested removal so I removed it. Until I learn otherwise from legal council we will continue to remove photos posted by others when the owner of the photo requests removal.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on May 31, 2016, 03:55:02 PM
Any word on the court activities today?  :dunno:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: HntnFsh on May 31, 2016, 06:44:40 PM
Any word on the court activities today?  :dunno:

Was wondering the same thing.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: DaveMonti on May 31, 2016, 08:53:20 PM
Everything was dismissed and the judge presided over a severe dressing down of the prosecutor for bringing "trumped up bogus charges against this fine gentleman". 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: h20hunter on May 31, 2016, 08:58:19 PM
Oh Dave you are gonna kick the Hornets nest !   :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: DaveMonti on May 31, 2016, 09:07:06 PM
I'm heavily invested in pharmaceuticals and am hoping to raise the collective blood pressure of the Pacific Northwest. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: teanawayslayer on June 01, 2016, 06:36:14 AM
Any word on the court activities today?  :dunno:

Was wondering the same thing.
I saw on the county website that there were two court dates in the near future.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: danderson on June 01, 2016, 06:46:00 AM
I hope it gets moved to Upper county district court, I'm have jury duty for the month, court cases on held on Thursdays
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Ghost Hunter on June 01, 2016, 07:51:31 AM
I hope it gets moved to Upper county district court, I'm have jury duty for the month, court cases on held on Thursdays
Somehow I think you just got elliminated.  :dunno: :chuckle: :sry:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Alchase on June 01, 2016, 10:00:31 AM
The defense attorney will probably eliminate any one from the jury pool who is a member on Hunting Wa.

And then sue them ...................  :rolleyes:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 2MANY on June 01, 2016, 10:43:03 AM
I was in Toledo last weekend for a Little League Tournament.

I saw the field was sponsored by some of the folks mentioned here.

Obviously this is a relevant fact.

Just sayin.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on June 01, 2016, 06:47:42 PM
Pre-trial has been moved out to, IIRC, June 21

 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Jpmiller on June 01, 2016, 07:36:11 PM
Do hunting rights get suspended for a case like this? This may have been discussed before but I would assume he can hunt unless he is found guilty.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on June 01, 2016, 07:39:42 PM
Pre-trial has been moved out to, IIRC, June 21

Jet kicking the can down the road so he can hunt this fall!  :bash:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: teanawayslayer on June 02, 2016, 04:45:36 AM
M-Ray your such a little gossip queen please tell me who told me to stop f-ing with that bull ??? As I have said earlier I had no part in guiding TR on that hunt since I had been archery hunting the two weeks prior in the Okanogan. I was ask if I would help gut and cape the bull for TR. So yes I'm guilty for helping a friend.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
that's a funny statement. Who's muzzleloader did he use to kill the bull? I am resending the other part of the post because your right I could be wrong. But I think you may have a twin. :chuckle:.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: time2hunt on June 02, 2016, 04:49:03 AM
Would love it


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: time2hunt on June 02, 2016, 04:57:03 AM
But be careful cause when you post a pic that's not me the other two guys might not be happy. Better get your who's in the truck story straight cause it wasn't me 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on June 02, 2016, 05:36:12 AM
Do hunting rights get suspended for a case like this? This may have been discussed before but I would assume he can hunt unless he is found guilty.

If found guilty of Unlawful Hunting of Big Game II -  then yes. 

And it is my understanding that the judge could also impose conditions on the defendant until this matter is cleared up.   
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: HntnFsh on June 02, 2016, 05:46:50 AM
Pre-trial has been moved out to, IIRC, June 21

Jet kicking the can down the road so he can hunt this fall!  :bash:

I wouldn't think anybody should be surprised by it.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on June 02, 2016, 08:36:06 AM
 :yeah: I'm sure that was his plan all along since he did buy the auction tag again this year.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Woodchuck on June 02, 2016, 08:43:49 AM
Anybody check draw results this morning?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: emac on June 02, 2016, 10:59:26 AM
Anybody check draw results this morning?
Yeah I drew the branched antler bull tag for gmu 334

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Woodchuck on June 02, 2016, 11:21:56 AM
Anybody check draw results this morning?
Yeah I drew the branched antler bull tag for gmu 334

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
Be sure to let us know how the hunt goes.  :tup:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Rainier10 on June 02, 2016, 11:44:20 AM
Anybody check draw results this morning?
Yeah I drew the branched antler bull tag for gmu 334

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
You are gonna want to use a muzzle loader or bow in that unit, unless you can get someone on the phone to say it is okay to use a high powered rifle.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on June 02, 2016, 11:58:42 AM
Anybody check draw results this morning?
Yeah I drew the branched antler bull tag for gmu 334

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
You are gonna want to use a muzzle loader or bow in that unit, unless you can get someone on the phone to say it is okay to use a high powered rifle.
Might wanna' have your trusted hunting consultants handle the call for ya'

After all that is what you are paying them the big money for. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bobcat on June 02, 2016, 02:17:51 PM
Anybody check draw results this morning?
Yeah I drew the branched antler bull tag for gmu 334

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
You are gonna want to use a muzzle loader or bow in that unit, unless you can get someone on the phone to say it is okay to use a high powered rifle.

A scoped 12 gauge shotgun with slugs would work well.  :tup:  (no special permission required)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: emac on June 02, 2016, 04:49:22 PM
Don't worry guys I got everything covered. Been on the phone and Google earth all afternoon. Damn this 334 unit looks step and deep. Time to get into some shape. I talk to a few guides today and I ended up hiring twisted horn outfitter. Check out there website and a the trophy's they have gotten. He told me we should be able to get a big book Roosevelt elk out of there. And that's what I want. I also wanted this hunt to be well documented so I have been searching camera crews to film the hunt. After a few phone calls a Google searches I found my guy. He had a show called trophy state of mind, even though he was usually the main hunter but he told me he had plenty of camera experience.  I told him his stuff looks good so hired him. He also told me he knew where all the good public land was in the 334. So this is looking like it is going to be a fantastic hunt I will keep you guys updated with the prep work and scouting trips on this once in a lifetime hunt.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on June 02, 2016, 06:05:51 PM
GMU 334 is within two hours of downtown Portland using the Reichert Trophy Elk Hunt Transporter.

Take one of these Extreme Western BT Sniffer Outers along and make it a combo hunt.   
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on June 02, 2016, 06:10:12 PM
Don't worry guys I got everything covered. Been on the phone and Google earth all afternoon. Damn this 334 unit looks step and deep. Time to get into some shape. I talk to a few guides today and I ended up hiring twisted horn outfitter. Check out there website and a the trophy's they have gotten. He told me we should be able to get a big book Roosevelt elk out of there. And that's what I want. I also wanted this hunt to be well documented so I have been searching camera crews to film the hunt. After a few phone calls a Google searches I found my guy. He had a show called trophy state of mind, even though he was usually the main hunter but he told me he had plenty of camera experience.  I told him his stuff looks good so hired him. He also told me he knew where all the good public land was in the 334. So this is looking like it is going to be a fantastic hunt I will keep you guys updated with the prep work and scouting trips on this once in a lifetime hunt.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

Can't wait to see some irrigated pastures in your footage. :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: NOCK NOCK on June 02, 2016, 08:39:58 PM
emac, Here is a easy way to get it to an adjoining unit for processing.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: idahohuntr on June 02, 2016, 09:23:20 PM
Regardless of the outcome of Reicherts criminal trial...his repeated skirmishes with the law and questionable actions have clearly made him the butt of a lot of jokes to hunters all across this state.  I may not ever kill a single bull that is anywhere near the size of any of his bulls...but my integrity and reputation will be intact...which is a lot more important to me than a room full of 400" bulls. 

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: emac on June 02, 2016, 09:35:46 PM
emac, Here is a easy way to get it to an adjoining unit for processing.
That looks alot easier than than the Google earth images I am seeing. I could put my 4 year old daughter out there just don't shoot her leg off :D  :D

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: chester on June 02, 2016, 10:28:03 PM
Ok this just got interesting again.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: mfswallace on June 02, 2016, 11:04:23 PM
It will be real interesting this season when all the "called in" poaching cases start happening  :yike:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on June 02, 2016, 11:43:38 PM
I predict a 0% increase.....

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 03, 2016, 03:37:14 PM
how do you guys know hes guilty?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 724wd on June 03, 2016, 03:41:28 PM
how do you guys know hes guilty?

because the facts have been confirmed by the accused.  he shot the bull in a unit not open killing to branch antler bulls.  The issue in question is IF an employee of the WDFW gave him the OK to shoot the bull, and if that person had authority to override the WAC/RCW (not sure which applies in this case).  The permit under which this bull was killed stated explicitly that it was not valid in GMUs not open to killing branch antler bulls.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on June 03, 2016, 03:44:49 PM
Well, of course he's guilty. He was tried and convicted in the court of HW. That's the only court system that matters. ;)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 03, 2016, 03:46:44 PM
 i didnt see that in the story i read. must have missed it, that would make casting preliminary judgement on this guy even worse. if a WDFW employee did in fact tell him he could shoot the bull i would hope all charges are dropped and that emplyee (if in the wrong) faces consiquinses. i would say f thats the case the hunter isnt guilty of anything more than being miss led. the anger should be directed towards the department.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on June 03, 2016, 04:00:30 PM
Well, of course he's guilty. He was tried and convicted in the court of HW. That's the only court system that matters. ;)

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on June 03, 2016, 04:02:36 PM
i would say f thats the case the hunter isnt guilty of anything more than being miss led.

 Misled? Absolutely not!

 If in fact a call was made asking for permission, which I highly doubt is the case, the fact that they even made a call at all suggests that they read the regs, understood the regs, and where looking for some way around them.

 There may have been a phone call made, but if indeed there was one, I would bet it was more in line in asking about firearm restrictions, and not with full disclosure that they were targeting a branched antler bull in a closed unit. :twocents:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Odell on June 03, 2016, 04:04:41 PM
i didnt see that in the story i read. must have missed it, that would make casting preliminary judgement on this guy even worse. if a WDFW employee did in fact tell him he could shoot the bull i would hope all charges are dropped and that emplyee (if in the wrong) faces consiquinses. i would say f thats the case the hunter isnt guilty of anything more than being miss led. the anger should be directed towards the department.

That's not how it works. It's the individuals responsibility to know the laws, not to mention even if he did call, we have no way to know what he asked or what was said.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on June 03, 2016, 04:20:44 PM
i would say f thats the case the hunter isnt guilty of anything more than being miss led.

 Misled? Absolutely not!

 If in fact a call was made asking for permission, which I highly doubt is the case, the fact that they even made a call at all suggests that they read the regs, understood the regs, and where looking for some way around them.

 There may have been a phone call made, but if indeed there was one, I would bet it was more in line in asking about firearm restrictions, and not with full disclosure that they were targeting a branched antler bull in a closed unit. :twocents:
The fact,  you assume.      :dunno:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 03, 2016, 04:34:24 PM
I suppose the argument would then be the official with f&g must have known the regs better and told them they are good. Regardless it sure is a different story than loaded up and driven to another gmus like the herald wrote and then every one and there brother handed down a guilty verdict on.it is written word though so it must be true.

My origanal question stands. How do you guys know he's guilty? Trial over yet? Even start?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: h20hunter on June 03, 2016, 04:40:09 PM
Is he guilty of taking a bull that was not legal per his tag? Yep.  That is pretty cut and dry.

Has ne been found criminally guilty in a court of law? Not yet, maybe will, maybe won't.


Lord Grizzly,  you have a bit of reading to do, unless you have already,  as most points of discussion have been beaten to death already.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: WAPatriot on June 03, 2016, 04:49:29 PM
334 isnt a true spike unit.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: full choke on June 03, 2016, 04:54:44 PM
I suppose the argument would then be the official with f&g must have known the regs better and told them they are good. Regardless it sure is a different story than loaded up and driven to another gmus like the herald wrote and then every one and there brother handed down a guilty verdict on.it is written word though so it must be true.

My origanal question stands. How do you guys know he's guilty? Trial over yet? Even start?

It is written in the regulations that the unit the bull was killed in was closed to branch antlered bull hunting. He had a tag that stated it was not good in units closed to branch antlered bull hunting. That is fact. That says he is guilty.
Loaded up and taken from the field to dress is not really part of the argument. That could be innocent as hell. Maybe the landowner didn't want the gutpile in his front yard? Not the issue at the center of this case.
You can speculate that permission from someone whom did not have the authority to give said permission frees him of his responsibility to obey the law. I would disagree. My daughter always asks for a cookie before dinner. I say no- that is the rule. She knows better- but she asks her brother if it is ok and he says "go ahead". You would reason she is not at fault and I should punish her brother? 

I guess we wait and see what the judge says... My gut tells me he walks. Again...
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 03, 2016, 05:25:45 PM
I think the entire thing is speculation at this point. Not just me. I was just asking how everybody knew he was guilty. Seems like it's all based on hear say. Not sure about your son, daughter and the cookie jar. I'd defer to mom on that one  :tung:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Alchase on June 03, 2016, 05:49:11 PM
You can think all you want, the only "fact" of this that is even in question is if the call was made and if he was given permission.
I would suggest you go back and read the preceding 24 pages.
Then speculate away.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Alchase on June 03, 2016, 05:52:26 PM
Another "First" post again trying to muddy the waters?

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: dscubame on June 03, 2016, 06:01:45 PM
Another "First" post again trying to muddy the waters?

Agree and they don't stand a chance with this seasoned crowd.  This thread has been worked well and twice.  (smile).  Rookies they are. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 03, 2016, 06:35:56 PM
Some first poster may know a little more than you think. Just seeing what everybody else "knew" is all. No muddy water
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: chester on June 03, 2016, 06:38:00 PM
Some first poster may know a little more than you think. Just seeing what everybody else "knew" is all. No muddy water
Seems the most important thing that's been established is a branch antler bull was killed in 334. It is illegal to kill a branch antler bull in 334.
I'd focus on that. None of the other stuff matters.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: WAPatriot on June 03, 2016, 06:48:12 PM
If a unit isn't a true spike unit a branched antler bull can be harvested one side needs to be a spike unless you have the raffle tag imo
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bullkllr on June 03, 2016, 06:49:28 PM
Some first poster may know a little more than you think. Just seeing what everybody else "knew" is all. No muddy water
Seems the most important thing that's been established is a branch antler bull was killed in 334. It is illegal to kill a branch antler bull in 334.
I'd focus on that. None of the other stuff matters.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 :yeah:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Mfowl on June 03, 2016, 06:51:26 PM
If a unit isn't a true spike unit a branched antler bull can be harvested one side needs to be a spike unless you have the raffle tag imo

GMU 334 (Ellensburg) is specifically closed to branch antlered bull harvest. It has nothing to do with true spike vs spike. Raffle tag holders are not exempt from this rule.
Title: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on June 03, 2016, 06:51:28 PM
If a unit isn't a true spike unit a branched antler bull can be harvested one side needs to be a spike unless you have the raffle tag imo

This is a non-factor and it does not make any sense at all. The guy had the raffle tag.
Title: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on June 03, 2016, 06:56:09 PM
(https://hunting-washington.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fuploads.tapatalk-cdn.com%2F20160604%2F9a3f5726bca0c13393b4426ab01458a1.jpg&hash=7994fedbdcb2fd13dba5473f0937fb28)

Just for the folks who are late to the party. One fact is that the bull was killed in GMU 334. The other fact is that GMu 334 does not have a season in it for branch antler bulls.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Alchase on June 03, 2016, 07:12:53 PM
Some first poster may know a little more than you think. Just seeing what everybody else "knew" is all. No muddy water

Then welcome to Hunting Washington, we would love to hear what you know!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Pinetar on June 03, 2016, 07:19:38 PM
334 isnt a true spike unit.

If 334 isn't a true spike unit (exception early archery) then tell me what it is

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 03, 2016, 07:23:58 PM
Some first poster may know a little more than you think. Just seeing what everybody else "knew" is all. No muddy water

Then welcome to Hunting Washington, we would love to hear what you know!

I'm just the new guy. Ears open mouth closed. For the most part...
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on June 03, 2016, 08:25:08 PM
The hail Mary long shot is that GMU 334 is tru-spike General and spike in the Late General.  It would be a long shot and that is something I recognized early on but kept that loophole to myself.

Is a spike w/a second one-inch or longer point on one side EVER recognized as a branch antlered animal in an area only open to hunting spike elk hunting?  I suppose that if you are already HUNTING IN A BRANCH ANTLER ONLY hunting area, in which true spikes are not legal or in an antler point restriction area then an inch or ?more/less? is pertinent in defining a legal animal as branched antler?
 

This is a distinction that defines the animal down into spike status in spike only areas and up in areas closed to spike elk hunting.  Since we are discussing GMU 334 the answer is only down to spike status is relevant.  Only antlerless, true spikes or spikes are ever legal.   

The restriction on the Raffle Tag unambiguously states "not open to branch antlered bull elk hunting."   In order to cary the argument you would have to prove that an animal that is legal in GMU 334 the animal would have to be defined up to branch antler states in order to be legal.  If not why not? 

What the Controlling Legal Authority (the Game Regs) clearly and unambiguously limits hunters to in GMU 334 is an elk that has NO MORE THAN ONE ANTLER with a second point EVER.  For the purpose of satisfying the law an elk that has a second or more points is a spike and not a branched antler bull in a spike only area so long as the other antler does not branch.

It is defined as a SPIKE in an area like GMU 334 and shooting such a an animal means you shot a "spike."  NOT a branched antler animal.  GMU 334 is not open to shooting branched antler elk EVER.  Period.  Full stop.

In other words GMU 334 is not open to branched antler elk hunting.


Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Jpmiller on June 03, 2016, 08:40:05 PM
As far as I can see it still boils down to what question was asked on his call to WDFW and what their answer was.


Whether or not he knew what the answer was before he asked the question is impossible to know, but if you can't go to WDFW for clarification who can you go to?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: dscubame on June 03, 2016, 08:42:11 PM
As far as I can see it still boils down to what question was asked on his call to WDFW and what their answer was.


Whether or not he knew what the answer was before he asked the question is impossible to know, but if you can't go to WDFW for clarification who can you go to?

The state published regulations like everyone else.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Jpmiller on June 03, 2016, 08:47:22 PM
As far as I can see it still boils down to what question was asked on his call to WDFW and what their answer was.


Whether or not he knew what the answer was before he asked the question is impossible to know, but if you can't go to WDFW for clarification who can you go to?

The state published regulations like everyone else.

I shared the story in an earlier post about asking WDFW about a few of the restriction on legal bows for hunting that I didnt think I fully inderstood before I purchased one . Am I in the same boat as Reichert then?

Assuming he asked if shooting the bull was legal.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: dscubame on June 03, 2016, 08:52:21 PM
As far as I can see it still boils down to what question was asked on his call to WDFW and what their answer was.


Whether or not he knew what the answer was before he asked the question is impossible to know, but if you can't go to WDFW for clarification who can you go to?

The state published regulations like everyone else.

I shared the story in an earlier post about asking WDFW about a few of the restriction on legal bows for hunting that I didnt think I fully inderstood before I purchased one . Am I in the same boat as Reichert then?

Assuming he asked if shooting the bull was legal.

If you do not understand a area in the regs that may be a little grey than yes you should inquire as you did.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on June 03, 2016, 08:58:44 PM
As far as I can see it still boils down to what question was asked on his call to WDFW and what their answer was.


Whether or not he knew what the answer was before he asked the question is impossible to know, but if you can't go to WDFW for clarification who can you go to?

The state published regulations like everyone else.

Again, at the risk of repeating myself:  We are not talking about an intern, we now know that we are talking about Morgan Grant, and his supervisor Rich Mann. 

Let me go out on a limb, knowing Rich Mann and knowing Morgan Grant's rep, any question was answered thus - what do the Game Regs say?  So you have just answered your own question. 

If a legally defined "spike" with a legal second point or seventy points on the second antler is a "spike' In GMU 334 then it means that the area is still "not open for branched antler bull elk."  It is open only for elk that can legally be defined as a spike.

If the same elk were in a different GMU then he is branched antlered and that is not so hard to figure out that any of my ten-year old hunter-ed students could miss that question.  An elk can be legal in a spike only area and also legal in a branched antler area with two steps.   

The thing that matters is that a "spike" is a legal spike and defined as ONLY being a "spike" in GMU 334 irrespective of whether an adjacent unit would recognize that very same elk as a legal branched antler bull.   
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: haus on June 03, 2016, 09:02:49 PM
Is there any case history where an internet forum owner was successfully sued for unsubstantiated statements posted by a forum member?

This isn't Gawker, and these posts are child's play compared to anything you'd see on YouTube, Twitter, or hell even the foxnews comments section.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on June 03, 2016, 09:04:10 PM
As far as I can see it still boils down to what question was asked on his call to WDFW and what their answer was.


Whether or not he knew what the answer was before he asked the question is impossible to know, but if you can't go to WDFW for clarification who can you go to?

The state published regulations like everyone else.

Again, at the risk of repeating myself:  We are not talking about an intern, we now know that we are talking about Morgan Grant, and his supervisor Rich Mann. 

Let me go out on a limb, knowing Rich Mann and knowing Morgan Grant's rep, any question was answered thus - what do the Game Regs say?  So you have just answered your own question. 

If a legally defined "spike" with a legal second point or seventy points on the second antler is a "spike' In GMU 334 then it means that the area is still "not open for branched antler bull elk."  It is open only for elk that can legally be defined as a spike.

If the same elk were in a different GMU then he is branched antlered and that is not so hard to figure out that any of my ten-year old hunter-ed students could miss that question.  An elk can be legal in a spike only area and also legal in a branched antler area with two steps.   

The thing that matters is that a "spike" is a legal spike and defined as ONLY being a "spike" in GMU 334 irrespective of whether an adjacent unit would recognize that very same elk as a legal branched antler bull.
So 334 is pen to branch bulls?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on June 03, 2016, 09:04:52 PM
.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on June 03, 2016, 09:09:24 PM
What I am getting at is that the gate is narrow and I will not allow it to be expanded to accommodate any nonsense.   In order for an GMU 334 to not be closed to branch antler bull hunting Todd Reichert has to show me where an elk that is not defined within that GMU as a spike or antlerless was open. 

It naturally follows, does it not, that if you cannot meet that criteria there is no question that it was not open for any other elk than could meet this restriction. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on June 03, 2016, 09:11:29 PM
Is there any case history where an internet forum owner was successfully sued for unsubstantiated statements posted by a forum member?

This isn't Gawker, and these posts are child's play compared to anything you'd see on YouTube, Twitter, or hell even the foxnews comments section.

I'm the focus of the threats and I am confident I have libeled no one.  Let the chips fall where they may. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on June 03, 2016, 09:13:37 PM
As before, I'm not defending, supporting or condoning Mr Reichert s actions just peering into all scenarios.

So, it's known that someone called and spoke with a well known, ethical and knowledgeable employee under the supervision of another such employee.

It's been identified that neither of them were legally able to authorize such a "hunt", but allegedly did. It wouldn't be the first time or last where someone without legal authority authorized an action they weren't authorized to do so.

How many times have people been let out with warnings? Was there a law created or passed that gave authority to the enforcement side to give warnings when people break the law and the law says otherwise?

Just saying. :dunno:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on June 03, 2016, 09:28:34 PM
A 1x6 is a branched antler bull. My view is "play stupid games, win stupid prizes"! Congrats WDFW  you win a PR nightmare.  The prosecutor (and JD) might want to look and evaluate possible outcomes. 
Maybe Rich Mann and Morgan Grant will accept responsibility and step down.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on June 03, 2016, 09:29:33 PM
I really can't wait for this to play out....

I somehow doubt it's gonna be as cut and dried as some of you think.

But, I could be wrong....
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 03, 2016, 09:31:49 PM
This is a good is discution and agin goes back to my question of how do you all know this guys guilty. I'll admit I'm playing a little dumber than I am but I'll play a little longer.

Humor me. (Even though I'm a new guy ) let's say your standing next to a game warden. A buck pops out of the trees. You say " mr warden can I shoot that buck?" Mr warden says " you bet" but then Three months  later it turns out there's some question  whether or not you could or even that it was out right poaching. What would you say? I'm guessing when it came down to it you'd say "I was staniding next to a warden and he told me to shoot it"

Maybe on the internet some of you would tell that warden " no way" but I bet in the woods the answer would be " bang"
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: fishngamereaper on June 03, 2016, 09:37:08 PM
This is a good is discution and agin goes back to my question of how do you all know this guys guilty. I'll admit I'm playing a little dumber than I am but I'll play a little longer.

Humor me. (Even though I'm a new guy ) let's say your standing next to a game warden. A buck pops out of the trees. You say " mr warden can I shoot that buck?" Mr warden says " you bet" but then Three months  later it turns out there's some question  whether or not you could or even that it was out right poaching. What would you say? I'm guessing when it came down to it you'd say "I was staniding next to a warden and he told me to shoot it"

Maybe on the internet some of you would tell that warden " no way" but I bet in the woods the answer would be " bang"

You should start playing smarter soon. Your post makes no sense in regards to this situation.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 03, 2016, 09:44:26 PM
Ok. Subtitute buck with bull. Make sense yet? Thought maybe that line could be read between. My bad, Internet after all . Lowest common denominator must be factored
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: chester on June 03, 2016, 09:46:39 PM
Ok. Subtitute buck with bull. Make sense yet? Thought maybe that line could be read between. My bad, Internet after all . Lowest common denominator must be factored
I guess what he was trying to say is stop speaking in riddles.
Every time the silt starts to settle someone has to go splashing through the puddle again.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on June 03, 2016, 09:50:47 PM
back to my question of how do you all know this guys guilty.

 He killed a branched antler bull in unit 334.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on June 03, 2016, 09:51:15 PM
Is there a reason this unit does not allow big bull harvest? Just to give the elk a place to get domesticated?  Caught in fences, euthanized and wasted?  To create controversy and "grey areas" to possibly be exploited? Is this effective management?  Are they (WDFW ) not taking opportunity from all hunters by facilitating a "safe" zone for these bulls in an agriculture conflict area?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 724wd on June 03, 2016, 09:51:26 PM
back to my question of how do you all know this guys guilty.

 He killed a branched antler bull in unit 334.

 :yeah: :bdid:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: chester on June 03, 2016, 09:51:38 PM
back to my question of how do you all know this guys guilty.

 He killed a branched antler bull in unit 334.

:yeah:


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on June 03, 2016, 09:53:45 PM
Is there a reason this unit does not allow big bull harvest? Just to give the elk a place to get domesticated?  Caught in fences, euthanized and wasted?  To create controversy and "grey areas" to possibly be exploited? Is this effective management?  Are they (WDFW ) not taking opportunity from all hunters by facilitating a "safe" zone for these bulls in an agriculture conflict area?

 Good question for another thread Tbar. :tup:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 03, 2016, 09:54:35 PM
back to my question of how do you all know this guys guilty.

 He killed a branched antler bull in unit 334.

Was he told he could by the governing body of wildlife for the state of Washington? If so should he be punished for having the audacity to ask and get the answer of yes? Maybe so maybe not. Just doesn't seem so black and white
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on June 03, 2016, 09:59:58 PM
As before, I'm not defending, supporting or condoning Mr Reichert s actions just peering into all scenarios.

So, it's known that someone called and spoke with a well known, ethical and knowledgeable employee under the supervision of another such employee.

It's been identified that neither of them were legally able to authorize such a "hunt", but allegedly did. It wouldn't be the first time or last where someone without legal authority authorized an action they weren't authorized to do so.

How many times have people been let out with warnings? Was there a law created or passed that gave authority to the enforcement side to give warnings when people break the law and the law says otherwise?

Just saying. :dunno:

You impress me as having the experience to have a valid opinion on how this plays out and I accept and respect your court room experience.   

I am looking at this case and threading the prosecuratorial needle is what animates me. 

I am confident that what I have shared as fact is valid.   I have a fairly good understanding of what the Controlling Legal Authority is and I just cannot get to the point at which any phone call could offer substantial mitigating evidence to sway the court. 

But, stranger things have happened. 

Everything else aside:  How could a well respected man in his home community, and a man who is well respected in the hunting community, allow himself to get into this predicament? 

For the love of God man, I gave Todd Reichert the benefit of the doubt, even though the investigators of the 2007 incident impressed me as adamant that they were convinced that "real time" elk spotting was being done by John Wick using a helicopter crew that Todd Reichert hired.  My God man, I gave the benefit of the doubt that Todd Reichert "did not know" that Wick was in real time radio contact. 

So.... no harm, no foul.  "I'll probably never hear the name Tod Reichert associated with any game law violation ever again."

So, what ever trophy Jon Wick is connected with is not 100% legit?  But how was Mr Reichert to know if Jon Wick was in real time contact with the real time aerial spotting that was, in my recollection, going on on his hunt?  I gave Mr Reichert the benefit of the doubt.

But as fate would have it, Mr Reichert's name comes up again and in a way that begs the question:  Is Mr Reichert...  An unrepentant poacher?  Totally naive?  Mentally unsuited to be in the field with an elk tag and a weapon?  Who the hell knows at this point. 

One thing I do know is that there is precious little to suggest that anyone could have ever got the notion that this scheme could ever end well. 

I am 100% confident of the what, when, where and who in this hunt.  I am confident that I can read and understand, interpret and apply the Game Regs and as such I have formed an opinion that is controversial with some - Mr Reichert should be prosecuted. 



         
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: haus on June 03, 2016, 10:02:56 PM
Is there any case history where an internet forum owner was successfully sued for unsubstantiated statements posted by a forum member?

This isn't Gawker, and these posts are child's play compared to anything you'd see on YouTube, Twitter, or hell even the foxnews comments section.

I'm the focus of the threats and I am confident I have libeled no one.  Let the chips fall where they may.
The topic is about Reichert, not you, and my post is in reference to the owner of the site and his stated concern over threatened legal action toward the site due to comments made in this topic and the previous.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on June 03, 2016, 10:04:49 PM
This is a good is discution and agin goes back to my question of how do you all know this guys guilty. I'll admit I'm playing a little dumber than I am but I'll play a little longer.

Humor me. (Even though I'm a new guy ) let's say your standing next to a game warden. A buck pops out of the trees. You say " mr warden can I shoot that buck?" Mr warden says " you bet" but then Three months  later it turns out there's some question  whether or not you could or even that it was out right poaching. What would you say? I'm guessing when it came down to it you'd say "I was staniding next to a warden and he told me to shoot it"

Maybe on the internet some of you would tell that warden " no way" but I bet in the woods the answer would be " bang"

Ranger/Bullwinkle didn't "pop out of the woods" either.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: klickman on June 03, 2016, 10:11:45 PM
This is a good is discution and agin goes back to my question of how do you all know this guys guilty. I'll admit I'm playing a little dumber than I am but I'll play a little longer.

Humor me. (Even though I'm a new guy ) let's say your standing next to a game warden. A buck pops out of the trees. You say " mr warden can I shoot that buck?" Mr warden says " you bet" but then Three months  later it turns out there's some question  whether or not you could or even that it was out right poaching. What would you say? I'm guessing when it came down to it you'd say "I was staniding next to a warden and he told me to shoot it"

Maybe on the internet some of you would tell that warden " no way" but I bet in the woods the answer would be " bang"
If you had an archery tag. Yep you'd be in trouble because your tag isn't valid.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 03, 2016, 10:14:30 PM
This is a good is discution and agin goes back to my question of how do you all know this guys guilty. I'll admit I'm playing a little dumber than I am but I'll play a little longer.

Humor me. (Even though I'm a new guy ) let's say your standing next to a game warden. A buck pops out of the trees. You say " mr warden can I shoot that buck?" Mr warden says " you bet" but then Three months  later it turns out there's some question  whether or not you could or even that it was out right poaching. What would you say? I'm guessing when it came down to it you'd say "I was staniding next to a warden and he told me to shoot it"

Maybe on the internet some of you would tell that warden " no way" but I bet in the woods the answer would be " bang"

Ranger/Bullwinkle didn't "pop out of the woods" either.

Does that really matter?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 03, 2016, 10:16:07 PM
Are you telling me if this was a 5x5 rag horn that nobody gave a name to it would be different ?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: chester on June 03, 2016, 10:17:56 PM
Shouldn't be any different. Not open to branch antler bulls so don't go there looking for branch antler Bulls.
He should be prosecuted the same if was a raghorn or a trophy .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jmscon on June 03, 2016, 10:21:39 PM
Shouldn't be any different. Not open to branch antler bulls so don't go there looking for branch antler Bulls.
He should be prosecuted the same if was a raghorn or a trophy .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 :yeah:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Colville on June 03, 2016, 10:24:10 PM
Are you telling me you are an absolute random new hunter who found hunt wa? Hahahahahaha as they say on espn, come-on, maaaaan!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: chester on June 03, 2016, 10:26:44 PM
Are you telling me you are an absolute random new hunter who found hunt wa? Hahahahahaha as they say on espn, come-on, maaaaan!

Just another new one sent to make a black and white situation seem like all the shades of gray. He will go away and another one will pop up before the next court date.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 03, 2016, 10:26:51 PM
back to my question of how do you all know this guys guilty.

 He killed a branched antler bull in unit 334.

Was he told he could by the governing body of wildlife for the state of Washington? If so should he be punished for having the audacity to ask and get the answer of yes? Maybe so maybe not. Just doesn't seem so black and white


Yup just a new guy. Still haven't seen this responded to yet.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on June 03, 2016, 10:27:08 PM
back to my question of how do you all know this guys guilty.

 He killed a branched antler bull in unit 334.

Was he told he could by the governing body of wildlife for the state of Washington? If so should he be punished for having the audacity to ask and get the answer of yes? Maybe so maybe not. Just doesn't seem so black and white

 Being new to the site and jumping into a conversation 25 pages in, not to mention 3 previously shut down threads, I'd suggest you start at page 1 and read through it, all these questions you are asking have been addressed, most more than once.

 Of course that's assuming you actually are looking for answers and not simply trolling. ;)

 Post 379 answers your last question addressed at me. http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,195504.msg2600032.html#msg2600032
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: chester on June 03, 2016, 10:29:05 PM
back to my question of how do you all know this guys guilty.

 He killed a branched antler bull in unit 334.

Was he told he could by the governing body of wildlife for the state of Washington? If so should he be punished for having the audacity to ask and get the answer of yes? Maybe so maybe not. Just doesn't seem so black and white


Yup just a new guy. Still haven't seen this responded to yet.

Here is a response. If all that is true it should end two professional careers and one hunting career. Seems like someone asking for and getting preferential treatment due to wealth. Rules should apply to all equally.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 03, 2016, 10:29:59 PM
That may we'll be the right answer there
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on June 03, 2016, 10:30:57 PM
Is there a reason this unit does not allow big bull harvest? Just to give the elk a place to get domesticated?  Caught in fences, euthanized and wasted?  To create controversy and "grey areas" to possibly be exploited? Is this effective management?  Are they (WDFW ) not taking opportunity from all hunters by facilitating a "safe" zone for these bulls in an agriculture conflict area?

Is there a reason?  It happened north of two decades ago and it was related to "proximity to Seattle" and mass numbers of trespass.  So it was decided to make this area ultra restrictive. 

But there was still the crop damage from he Colucum herd and so putting pressure on the herd would be sufficient to make a harvest of elk a certainty.  And everybody always understood that it was fair that bull elk were off limits.

It just is what it is and has been.  Live it, love it, learn it.  And nobody gets a pass.

But no.  Somebodies thought they were smarter by half.  You play with the bull... you get the horn.  Live it, love it, learn it.


And Todd Reichert getting the horn is evidently what it will take for everybody to get the message. 

My God man, "I eat elk, but I don't hunt elk." just come over and shoot that big bull... and I could have sat on my friend's veranda and popped a trophy bull and halved it with them.  But it is not legal.  They know it and I know it and our freezer is always full anyway, but I don't have a big set of antlers and I am OK with that.
 

   
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 03, 2016, 10:32:40 PM
My quiestion still stands. Of how does every one on this web site knows unequivocally of this mans guilt. Guilty until proven innocent huh? Lots of " patriots" on here forget the system were built on once they see somthing that pisses them off.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: chester on June 03, 2016, 10:33:51 PM
My quiet ion still stands. Of his every one on this web site knows unequivocally of this mans guilt. Guilty until proven innocent huh? Lots of " patriots" on here forget the system were built on once they see so thing that pisses them off.

You claim to have knowledge of the hunt . So straight forward yes or no. Was the bull shot in gmu 334?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on June 03, 2016, 10:34:37 PM
My quiet ion still stands. Of his every one on this web site knows unequivocally of this mans guilt. Guilty until proven innocent huh? Lots of " patriots" on here forget the system were built on once they see so thing that pisses them off.

 It's been admitted that he shot the bull in unit 334.....guilty, everything else is for the courts.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 03, 2016, 10:38:19 PM
No such thing as exonerating circumstances phool?

Your buddy pope would probably disagree, based on his profession and all
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: mfswallace on June 03, 2016, 10:39:11 PM
My quiet ion still stands. Of his every one on this web site knows unequivocally of this mans guilt. Guilty until proven innocent huh? Lots of " patriots" on here forget the system were built on once they see so thing that pisses them off.

You claim to have knowledge of the hunt . So straight forward yes or no. Was the bull shot in gmu 334?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well  :dunno:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: chester on June 03, 2016, 10:39:55 PM
I'm waiting patiently for his reply. Shouldn't take that long to type one word.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on June 03, 2016, 10:41:42 PM
No such thing as exonerating circumstances phool?

  You asked for evidence of guilt, of this there is no question, he killed a branched antler bull in unit 334........period, can't spin that!

 As I said, everything else is up to the courts.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bullkllr on June 03, 2016, 10:42:09 PM
(https://hunting-washington.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fthisfish.info%2Fmedia%2Fcache%2Ffe%2Ff7%2Ffef706723939f1dfb388140e837f3b68.jpg&hash=49031c1f5bec1d1aa864b5c3c7df4b39)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 724wd on June 03, 2016, 10:54:01 PM
Shouldn't be any different. Not open to branch antler bulls so don't go there looking for branch antler Bulls.
He should be prosecuted the same if was a raghorn or a trophy .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
:yeah: :yeah: :yeah:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 03, 2016, 10:55:21 PM
No such thing as exonerating circumstances phool?

  You asked for evidence of guilt, of this there is no question, he killed a branched antler bull in unit 334........period, can't spin that!

 As I said, everything else is up to the courts.

Guilt is decided at the end of the trial, not the beginning. Even with a confession
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on June 03, 2016, 10:57:05 PM
My quiestion still stands. Of how does every one on this web site knows unequivocally of this mans guilt. Guilty until proven innocent huh? Lots of " patriots" on here forget the system were built on once they see somthing that pisses them off.

I know the facts.  I have a fairly good understanding of what the Controlling Legal Authority is and I have listened to what is offered up as a mitigating factor. 

I say that charges were warranted and I offer my opinion as to how what is offered as mitigating factors should be considered. 

I am very confident of what I have presented as fact, I am very confident in my understanding of how the Controlling Legal Authority applies, I have offered what I think impeaches every defense offered up and I have been straight up on what my opinion regarding guilt/innocence is and why. 

Deconstruct my arguments and offer an alternative outcome based on what you have to offer as fact.   Let us know exactly what the supposed phone calls could possibly have contained that make this a "grey area."   

I have stood my ground and defended my statements of fact and now they have been validated.  I stand behind my assumptions as more likely than not as valid and have invited impeachment.  Have I not? 

Let's have some "put up."  Or just shut up.  Let's have some substance to give reason to juxtapose my facts and what I see as is more likely than not.  Let's get away from what is possible went down to what is more likely than not what went down. 

In other words let's have something that is verifiable as factual that makes this nebulous phone call mitigate a charge of Unlawful Hunting of Big Game II.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on June 03, 2016, 11:00:34 PM
Would you agree that there still might be exonerating circumstances, or are you so sure that there can't even be the possibility?

I just don't see how anyone who wasn't directly involved can be so certain.

I also can't understand why I keep coming back to this thread for a re-re-re-re-rehashing.

 :yike:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: mfswallace on June 03, 2016, 11:01:39 PM
I'm waiting patiently for his reply. Shouldn't take that long to type one word.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 :dunno: 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on June 03, 2016, 11:04:02 PM
Would you agree that there still might be exonerating circumstances, or are you so sure that there can't even be the possibility?

I just don't see how anyone who wasn't directly involved can be so certain.

I also can't understand why I keep coming back to this thread for a re-re-re-re-rehashing.

 :yike:

I am patiently awaiting the Court's decision.   But that does not mean that I do not have an opinion re: what is known.  If "they" give me something to consider that I am not aware of... you know you will hear it here first. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on June 03, 2016, 11:28:50 PM
JD, if the charges are dropped (if) are you going to file an appeal?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on June 03, 2016, 11:34:19 PM
Jd will be in western state and more than likely on suicide watch, when this horrendous "poaching" case gets dismissed...
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: 257 Wby Mag on June 03, 2016, 11:35:40 PM
Hell, let ol Tod smoke some Washington wolves he'd be a hero on here!! Grin
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: PlateauNDN on June 03, 2016, 11:40:47 PM
New member or not it does bring another perspective to the discussion. And is that so wrong? So, are you suggesting it's a conspiracy that this and other recent new members came here strictly by the suspect of this topic? I say take the  :tinfoil:  off and why not be just a bit glad that this site has continued to expand its network and reach.

Hell, a very similar incident occurred at clover springs which brought me here. Was that a conspiracy by those charged and found guilty for me to come here and muddy the waters for them?  Wait, I hear it now, it's the theme song to the x-files playing and special agent fox mulder is sitting here explaining to me the connection between bullwinkle, bigfoot and aliens. >:(
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on June 04, 2016, 12:10:22 AM
This is a good is discution and agin goes back to my question of how do you all know this guys guilty. I'll admit I'm playing a little dumber than I am but I'll play a little longer.

Humor me. (Even though I'm a new guy ) let's say your standing next to a game warden. A buck pops out of the trees. You say " mr warden can I shoot that buck?" Mr warden says " you bet" but then Three months  later it turns out there's some question  whether or not you could or even that it was out right poaching. What would you say? I'm guessing when it came down to it you'd say "I was staniding next to a warden and he told me to shoot it"

Maybe on the internet some of you would tell that warden " no way" but I bet in the woods the answer would be " bang"

Ranger/Bullwinkle didn't "pop out of the woods" either.

Does that really matter?

Indeed. This shoot was planned ahead of time. There were locals involved who surely knew the laws for the specific GMU. It was not a surprise to them that killing big bulls in the GMU they were hunting in was not legal. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bigshooter on June 04, 2016, 12:46:04 AM
Jd will be in western state and more than likely on suicide watch, when this horrendous "poaching" case gets dismissed...

 :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle:

If the case gets dismissed I think JD might go crazy and just keep repeating himself.....O wait.  :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on June 04, 2016, 05:19:29 AM
JD, if the charges are dropped (if) are you going to file an appeal?

Not at all.  I have not seen anything that mitigates the offense.  That does not mean it is not out there though. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 04, 2016, 07:00:56 AM
This is a good is discution and agin goes back to my question of how do you all know this guys guilty. I'll admit I'm playing a little dumber than I am but I'll play a little longer.

Humor me. (Even though I'm a new guy ) let's say your standing next to a game warden. A buck pops out of the trees. You say " mr warden can I shoot that buck?" Mr warden says " you bet" but then Three months  later it turns out there's some question  whether or not you could or even that it was out right poaching. What would you say? I'm guessing when it came down to it you'd say "I was staniding next to a warden and he told me to shoot it"

Maybe on the internet some of you would tell that warden " no way" but I bet in the woods the answer would be " bang"

Ranger/Bullwinkle didn't "pop out of the woods" either.

Does that really matter?

Indeed. This shoot was planned ahead of time. There were locals involved who surely knew the laws for the specific GMU. It was not a surprise to them that killing big bulls in the GMU they were hunting in was not legal.

No the locals were not sure about the rules for that tag. That is why the call was made to ask. You 206er's will not listen to the truth because it's not what you want to hear. Now go ahead and carry on  with your false statements..........
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: chester on June 04, 2016, 07:09:07 AM
This is a good is discution and agin goes back to my question of how do you all know this guys guilty. I'll admit I'm playing a little dumber than I am but I'll play a little longer.

Humor me. (Even though I'm a new guy ) let's say your standing next to a game warden. A buck pops out of the trees. You say " mr warden can I shoot that buck?" Mr warden says " you bet" but then Three months  later it turns out there's some question  whether or not you could or even that it was out right poaching. What would you say? I'm guessing when it came down to it you'd say "I was staniding next to a warden and he told me to shoot it"

Maybe on the internet some of you would tell that warden " no way" but I bet in the woods the answer would be " bang"

Ranger/Bullwinkle didn't "pop out of the woods" either.

Does that really matter?

Indeed. This shoot was planned ahead of time. There were locals involved who surely knew the laws for the specific GMU. It was not a surprise to them that killing big bulls in the GMU they were hunting in was not legal.

No the locals were not sure about the rules for that tag. That is why the call was made to ask. You 206er's will not listen to the truth because it's not what you want to hear. Now go ahead and carry on  with your false statements..........

So is the court defense going to claim that there are reading comprehension issues or possibly illiteracy among the involved party's?
It spells it out exceedingly clearly in the regs and in very simple terms that 334 was a no fly zone.
Glad you showed up to jump in the puddle .


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: HntnFsh on June 04, 2016, 07:19:36 AM
 I find it hard to imagine that the locals didn't know the rules to the area as mentioned. Especially this particular rule. I don't find it hard to imagine them saying they didn't know the rules though. Are they that dumb? Or just playing that dumb? My guess would be the latter. Which probably isn't a bad idea given the circumstances!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 04, 2016, 07:23:40 AM
I guess the answer on the other end of the line shoulda been a pretty simple no then huh? I mean if some dumb red neck locals must know then surely a professional at f&g must
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: h20hunter on June 04, 2016, 07:24:39 AM
Not really.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 04, 2016, 07:26:11 AM
Or should that be part of the narritive? The pro got it wrong too. Who should be held to the higher standard ? The hunter did ask after all. No such thing as a stupid question but there are stupid answers
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 04, 2016, 07:28:51 AM
I find it hard to imagine that the locals didn't know the rules to the area as mentioned. Especially this particular rule. I don't find it hard to imagine them saying they didn't know the rules though. Are they that dumb? Or just playing that dumb? My guess would be the latter. Which probably isn't a bad idea given the circumstances!

If the rules on this tag were that clear one would think WDFW would know them. Yet after a call into the them and a call back from then after they researched it they determined it was legal.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 04, 2016, 07:32:15 AM
Or should that be part of the narritive? The pro got it wrong too. Who should be held to the higher standard ? The hunter did ask after all. No such thing as a stupid question but there are stupid answers

These few westsiders on their witchhunt don't like it when pesky facts like that are brought up.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 04, 2016, 07:33:30 AM
Your telling me there were 2 phone calls! But everybody here "knew" there was 1! How could it be? Just like they know he's guilty I guess
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Bullkllr on June 04, 2016, 07:37:53 AM
I find it hard to imagine that the locals didn't know the rules to the area as mentioned. Especially this particular rule. I don't find it hard to imagine them saying they didn't know the rules though. Are they that dumb? Or just playing that dumb? My guess would be the latter. Which probably isn't a bad idea given the circumstances!

If the rules on this tag were that clear one would think WDFW would know them. Yet after a call into the them and a call back from then after they researched it they determined it was legal.

Do you find the rule unclear?

What is unclear to me is what transpired in the supposed phone call(s).

Was there a 'grassy knoll' near the hunt location? :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on June 04, 2016, 07:43:11 AM
This is a good is discution and agin goes back to my question of how do you all know this guys guilty. I'll admit I'm playing a little dumber than I am but I'll play a little longer.

Humor me. (Even though I'm a new guy ) let's say your standing next to a game warden. A buck pops out of the trees. You say " mr warden can I shoot that buck?" Mr warden says " you bet" but then Three months  later it turns out there's some question  whether or not you could or even that it was out right poaching. What would you say? I'm guessing when it came down to it you'd say "I was staniding next to a warden and he told me to shoot it"

Maybe on the internet some of you would tell that warden " no way" but I bet in the woods the answer would be " bang"

Ranger/Bullwinkle didn't "pop out of the woods" either.

Does that really matter?

Indeed. This shoot was planned ahead of time. There were locals involved who surely knew the laws for the specific GMU. It was not a surprise to them that killing big bulls in the GMU they were hunting in was not legal.
How do ASSUMPTIONS hold up in court? Or do you personally know the locals involved and have received their confessions. 
This is an unreal witch hunt coming from many levels on this forum(not bearpaw).
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on June 04, 2016, 07:49:32 AM
I find it hard to imagine that the locals didn't know the rules to the area as mentioned. Especially this particular rule. I don't find it hard to imagine them saying they didn't know the rules though. Are they that dumb? Or just playing that dumb? My guess would be the latter. Which probably isn't a bad idea given the circumstances!

If the rules on this tag were that clear one would think WDFW would know them. Yet after a call into the them and a call back from then after they researched it they determined it was legal.

Do you find the rule unclear?

What is unclear to me is what transpired in the supposed phone call(s).

Was there a 'grassy knoll' near the hunt location? :chuckle:
I  do find many rules "unclear" and fyi so did Mick Cope.  More assumptions.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 04, 2016, 07:51:04 AM
Your telling me there were 2 phone calls! But everybody here "knew" there was 1! How could it be? Just like they know he's guilty I guess

The few urban cowboys on here that have been going on and on abut this on here have no clue about the details. And don't seem to have any problem coming up with lies to support thier witchhunt.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: h20hunter on June 04, 2016, 07:54:38 AM
I think I have read many assumptions and very few lies. Some new members have joined with broad proclamations on clearing things up but have not done so.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 04, 2016, 07:56:41 AM
I find it hard to imagine that the locals didn't know the rules to the area as mentioned. Especially this particular rule. I don't find it hard to imagine them saying they didn't know the rules though. Are they that dumb? Or just playing that dumb? My guess would be the latter. Which probably isn't a bad idea given the circumstances!

If the rules on this tag were that clear one would think WDFW would know them. Yet after a call into the them and a call back from then after they researched it they determined it was legal.

Do you find the rule unclear?

What is unclear to me is what transpired in the supposed phone call(s).

Was there a 'grassy knoll' near the hunt location? :chuckle:

Actually seems real clear to me. If your unsure about something call the experts and ask. And at that point a clear answer was givin.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 04, 2016, 07:59:43 AM
Your telling me there were 2 phone calls! But everybody here "knew" there was 1! How could it be? Just like they know he's guilty I guess

The few urban cowboys on here that have been going on and on abut this on here have no clue about the details. And don't seem to have any problem coming up with lies to support thier witchhunt.


I think it may be time for one of my all time favorite sayings

The truth is like poetry, and everybody hates poetry  :hello:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 04, 2016, 08:01:50 AM
I think I have read many assumptions and very few lies. Some new members have joined with broad proclamations on clearing things up but have not done so.

I gave you the name of the person at WDFW who said it was legal. For most  rational people that would clear things up.  Your twin brother Hasty has said over and over again that other neighbors told the group to stop asking about that bull on their property. That is a flat out lie.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Kazekurt on June 04, 2016, 08:02:02 AM
I'm in the process of buying a house and their is a page I had to sign that says something to the effect of,"this written agreement supersedes any other verbal agreements."  Perhaps we have gotten to the point that this world has become so Litigious that they will have to put a line like this in the hunting pamphlet.  In my profession, we deal with DOT and enforcement officers  all the time when we need clarification on issues that are not clear.   We, however, always  ask for a Written response  and we do not question rules and laws that are painstakingly clear.  Law enforcement  officers are good people, but it is very hard for them to remember every single law and all of its applications all the time.  Believe me, I can ask DOT officers the same question and get Several different answers.  For this reason alone,  it is best to research the printed regulations first and the hunting pamphlet is not even that large compared to the RCW's and WAC's.  IMHO,  I believe the accused in this case knew the law  and was simply fishing for a way around it  and in that regard he may have perhaps succeeded.   WHat is not up for dispute is that he has given the hunting community a black eye by choosing to shoot a bull of great notoriety under  questionable circumstances.   Sometimes it is best to refrain from even the appearance of wrongdoing, even if it could possibly be legally justified .  I suspect the accussed is probably more upset by the damage to his reputation than  he is about any civil penalties that the outcome of his trial could bring  and all the money in the world won't fix that, nor will  The eventual outcome of his proceedings.   My only question is this, was That bull worth it?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on June 04, 2016, 08:07:50 AM
Your telling me there were 2 phone calls! But everybody here "knew" there was 1! How could it be? Just like they know he's guilty I guess

The few urban cowboys on here that have been going on and on abut this on here have no clue about the details. And don't seem to have any problem coming up with lies to support thier witchhunt.


I think it may be time for one of my all time favorite sayings

The truth is like poetry, and everybody f*n hates poetry  :hello:

And right here we have an excellent example of your blatant disregard for the rules.  You read the rules when you signed up for an account here, and if there was any clarification needed the site owner has ask the rules be followed and he has repeatedly stated that contractions or substitutions of symbols for letters in profanity are rule breaking. 

This just illustrates that your ilk does not regard rules as parameters that are to be respected, you see them as something to get around and in the case of poaching this elk you guys were too clever by half. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on June 04, 2016, 08:08:26 AM
This is a good is discution and agin goes back to my question of how do you all know this guys guilty. I'll admit I'm playing a little dumber than I am but I'll play a little longer.

Humor me. (Even though I'm a new guy ) let's say your standing next to a game warden. A buck pops out of the trees. You say " mr warden can I shoot that buck?" Mr warden says " you bet" but then Three months  later it turns out there's some question  whether or not you could or even that it was out right poaching. What would you say? I'm guessing when it came down to it you'd say "I was staniding next to a warden and he told me to shoot it"

Maybe on the internet some of you would tell that warden " no way" but I bet in the woods the answer would be " bang"

Ranger/Bullwinkle didn't "pop out of the woods" either.

Does that really matter?

Indeed. This shoot was planned ahead of time. There were locals involved who surely knew the laws for the specific GMU. It was not a surprise to them that killing big bulls in the GMU they were hunting in was not legal.

No the locals were not sure about the rules for that tag. That is why the call was made to ask. You 206er's will not listen to the truth because it's not what you want to hear. Now go ahead and carry on  with your false statements..........

The locals didn't need to know the rules of the tag, the guy pulling the trigger needed to though, and most likely did know the rules!  :twocents:

So who made the call, the locals or the trigger puller? Did the trigger man set up the locals as the fall guy?  :yike:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on June 04, 2016, 08:14:32 AM
I think I have read many assumptions and very few lies. Some new members have joined with broad proclamations on clearing things up but have not done so.

I gave you the name of the person at WDFW who said it was legal. For most  rational people that would clear things up.  Your twin brother Hasty has said over and over again that other neighbors told the group to stop asking about that bull on their property. That is a flat out lie.

I have said that at least one individual who was involved in the hunt had been told in the past to leave those elk alone.   
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 04, 2016, 08:14:38 AM
Your telling me there were 2 phone calls! But everybody here "knew" there was 1! How could it be? Just like they know he's guilty I guess

The few urban cowboys on here that have been going on and on abut this on here have no clue about the details. And don't seem to have any problem coming up with lies to support thier witchhunt.


I think it may be time for one of my all time favorite sayings

The truth is like poetry, and everybody f*n hates poetry  :hello:

And right here we have an excellent example of your blatant disregard for the rules.  You read the rules when you signed up for an account here, and if there was any clarification needed the site owner has ask the rules be followed and he has repeatedly stated that contractions or substitutions of symbols for letters in profanity are rule breaking. 

This just illustrates that your ilk does not regard rules as parameters that are to be respected, you see them as something to get around and in the case of poaching this elk you guys were too clever by half.

Take a breath, I sent the mod an apology when I saw he edited it. But for all you know I meant freakin and your minds just in the gutter. Didn't mean to wind ya up there was trying to lighten the mood. Sorry I offended you or anybody else
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on June 04, 2016, 08:18:36 AM
Your telling me there were 2 phone calls! But everybody here "knew" there was 1! How could it be? Just like they know he's guilty I guess

The few urban cowboys on here that have been going on and on abut this on here have no clue about the details. And don't seem to have any problem coming up with lies to support thier witchhunt.


I think it may be time for one of my all time favorite sayings

The truth is like poetry, and everybody f*n hates poetry  :hello:

And right here we have an excellent example of your blatant disregard for the rules.  You read the rules when you signed up for an account here, and if there was any clarification needed the site owner has ask the rules be followed and he has repeatedly stated that contractions or substitutions of symbols for letters in profanity are rule breaking. 

This just illustrates that your ilk does not regard rules as parameters that are to be respected, you see them as something to get around and in the case of poaching this elk you guys were too clever by half.

Take a breath, I sent the mod an apology when I saw he edited it. But for all you know I meant freakin and your minds just in the gutter. Didn't mean to wind ya up there was trying to lighten the mood. Sorry I offended you or anybody else

Just pointing out that even though you signed that you have read and understand the rules, you still went looking for a way around the rules. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: h20hunter on June 04, 2016, 08:19:31 AM
Don't get personal folks .
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 04, 2016, 08:23:53 AM
Was not looking for a way around any rules. I made a mistake, admitted it, and apologized to the appropriate party and then publicly on this thread. Your attempt to somehow relate that to the topic of this discution  I think speaks more volumes of your intent than mine. We should leave this alone now and respect the moderators request of not getting personal or petty. I'm willing to, and agin I'm sorry if I offended you.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: HntnFsh on June 04, 2016, 08:30:07 AM
I find it hard to imagine that the locals didn't know the rules to the area as mentioned. Especially this particular rule. I don't find it hard to imagine them saying they didn't know the rules though. Are they that dumb? Or just playing that dumb? My guess would be the latter. Which probably isn't a bad idea given the circumstances!

If the rules on this tag were that clear one would think WDFW would know them. Yet after a call into the them and a call back from then after they researched it they determined it was legal.

So you must have been on 1 end of that call to know exactly what was said by both parties Or are you also making an assumption?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: h20hunter on June 04, 2016, 08:30:58 AM
Your post was a direct  attack on another member. You last post was unnecessary . 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 04, 2016, 08:37:45 AM
Your post was a direct  attack on another member. You last post was unnecessary .

How was that an attack?  I stated a true fact and asked him a question?  And now you are deleting "unnecessary " posts, well mine was far from the first on this thread alone. But the rest seem to remain.  You just didn't like what I said and used your moderator "power" to remove it even though no rules were broken. Yes that is bias by definition.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on June 04, 2016, 08:40:00 AM
I find it hard to imagine that the locals didn't know the rules to the area as mentioned. Especially this particular rule. I don't find it hard to imagine them saying they didn't know the rules though. Are they that dumb? Or just playing that dumb? My guess would be the latter. Which probably isn't a bad idea given the circumstances!

If the rules on this tag were that clear one would think WDFW would know them. Yet after a call into the them and a call back from then after they researched it they determined it was legal.

So you must have been on 1 end of that call to know exactly what was said by both parties Or are you also making an assumption?

Wouldn't it be cool if the department recorded that call and it comes out in court.   :chuckle:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 04, 2016, 08:40:14 AM
I find it hard to imagine that the locals didn't know the rules to the area as mentioned. Especially this particular rule. I don't find it hard to imagine them saying they didn't know the rules though. Are they that dumb? Or just playing that dumb? My guess would be the latter. Which probably isn't a bad idea given the circumstances!

If the rules on this tag were that clear one would think WDFW would know them. Yet after a call into the them and a call back from then after they researched it they determined it was legal.

So you must have been on 1 end of that call to know exactly what was said by both parties Or are you also making an assumption?

Funny thing about the Internet is you never really know who your talking too. Could be he's making no assumptions at all and was part of that conversation. Could be...
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: HntnFsh on June 04, 2016, 08:44:36 AM
I find it hard to imagine that the locals didn't know the rules to the area as mentioned. Especially this particular rule. I don't find it hard to imagine them saying they didn't know the rules though. Are they that dumb? Or just playing that dumb? My guess would be the latter. Which probably isn't a bad idea given the circumstances!

If the rules on this tag were that clear one would think WDFW would know them. Yet after a call into the them and a call back from then after they researched it they determined it was legal.

So you must have been on 1 end of that call to know exactly what was said by both parties Or are you also making an assumption?

Funny thing about the Internet is you never really know who your talking too. Could be he's making no assumptions at all and was part of that conversation. Could be...

That is why I made that statement. I guess I should have put a question mark at the end of the first sentence though. I would like to see his reply to my question.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 04, 2016, 08:50:18 AM
I find it hard to imagine that the locals didn't know the rules to the area as mentioned. Especially this particular rule. I don't find it hard to imagine them saying they didn't know the rules though. Are they that dumb? Or just playing that dumb? My guess would be the latter. Which probably isn't a bad idea given the circumstances!

If the rules on this tag were that clear one would think WDFW would know them. Yet after a call into the them and a call back from then after they researched it they determined it was legal.

So you must have been on 1 end of that call to know exactly what was said by both parties Or are you also making an assumption?

Funny thing about the Internet is you never really know who your talking too. Could be he's making no assumptions at all and was part of that conversation. Could be...

That is why I made that statement. I guess I should have put a question mark at the end of the first sentence though. I would like to see his reply to my question.

All I will say is what I said is 100% factual and no assumptions were made.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bigtex on June 04, 2016, 08:59:52 AM
I've gotten a couple messages regarding the prosecutors role in this case, which in reality is now the case for all criminal cases.

Prior to 2012 an officer could role up on a natural resource crime (say a poaching) and in 95% of the cases hand a guy a criminal citation with a fine on it and drive away. At that point the individual was charged with the crime(s) on the ticket, he could either pay up or go to court. At that time natural resource crimes were the only criminal offenses that could be handled via a ticket bail forfeiture (fine). For all other crimes (drugs, alcohol, driving, etc) you had to go to court.

Starting in 2012 ALL criminal offenses had to have a mandatory court date. Starting in the early to mid 2000s as courts really started to get backlogged you had a lot of prosecutor offices telling officers to not issue criminal citations with mandatory court dates because is if an officer hands you a criminal citation with a mandatory court date you must have your first appearance within 15 days. In comparison if the officer doesn't give you a citation but rather sends a report to the prosecutor the prosecutor has 1 year to file misdemeanor charges and 2 years to file gross misdemeanor charges. This also helps with the scheduling of court dockets. Court dockets were always packed after summer holiday weekends because people had to appear within 15 days.

What this also means now is that someone in the prosecutors office is reviewing every single case that gets charged, no more Officer Smith cited a guy with a natural resource misdemeanor and it's a shaky/iffy case so lets see if he just pays it. Those iffy cases aren't being prosecuted anymore (in most cases) because you now have to have prosecutor support for everything. So in reality if you are charged in WA now with a criminal offense (anything other than an infraction/ticket) the officer has essentially shown the prosecutor that it's a good case and the prosecutor is agreeing to charge.

Some of the smaller prosecutor offices (fewer every year) in WA are still operating under the old system of letting officers hand people criminal citations which means they must appear in 15 days, but the majority are operating under the system of contact the violator and send the prosecutor the report and wait and see if they charge.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: HntnFsh on June 04, 2016, 09:01:11 AM
I find it hard to imagine that the locals didn't know the rules to the area as mentioned. Especially this particular rule. I don't find it hard to imagine them saying they didn't know the rules though. Are they that dumb? Or just playing that dumb? My guess would be the latter. Which probably isn't a bad idea given the circumstances!

If the rules on this tag were that clear one would think WDFW would know them. Yet after a call into the them and a call back from then after they researched it they determined it was legal.

So you must have been on 1 end of that call to know exactly what was said by both parties Or are you also making an assumption?

Funny thing about the Internet is you never really know who your talking too. Could be he's making no assumptions at all and was part of that conversation. Could be...

That is why I made that statement. I guess I should have put a question mark at the end of the first sentence though. I would like to see his reply to my question.

All I will say is what I said is 100% factual and no assumptions were made.

For you to be able to make that statement you would have to have been able to, at the very least heard both sides of the conversations of the phone call(s)? Otherwise its just an assumption. So apparently you were directly involved in this whole thing in some way. Or heard recordings of the phone call(s) after the fact.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: HntnFsh on June 04, 2016, 09:04:37 AM
I've gotten a couple messages regarding the prosecutors role in this case, which in reality is now the case for all criminal cases.

Prior to 2012 an officer could role up on a natural resource crime (say a poaching) and in 95% of the cases hand a guy a criminal citation with a fine on it and drive away. At that point the individual was charged with the crime(s) on the ticket, he could either pay up or go to court. At that time natural resource crimes were the only criminal offenses that could be handled via a ticket bail forfeiture (fine). For all other crimes (drugs, alcohol, driving, etc) you had to go to court.

Starting in 2012 ALL criminal offenses had to have a mandatory court date. Starting in the early to mid 2000s as courts really started to get backlogged you had a lot of prosecutor offices telling officers to not issue criminal citations with mandatory court dates because is if an officer hands you a criminal citation with a mandatory court date you must have your first appearance within 15 days. In comparison if the officer doesn't give you a citation but rather sends a report to the prosecutor the prosecutor has 1 year to file misdemeanor charges and 2 years to file gross misdemeanor charges. This also helps with the scheduling of court dockets. Court dockets were always packed after summer holiday weekends because people had to appear within 15 days.

What this also means now is that someone in the prosecutors office is reviewing every single case that gets charged, no more Officer Smith cited a guy with a natural resource misdemeanor and it's a shaky/iffy case so lets see if he just pays it. Those iffy cases aren't being prosecuted anymore (in most cases) because you now have to have prosecutor support for everything. So in reality if you are charged in WA now with a criminal offense (anything other than an infraction/ticket) the officer has essentially shown the prosecutor that it's a good case and the prosecutor is agreeing to charge.

Some of the smaller prosecutor offices (fewer every year) in WA are still operating under the old system of letting officers hand people criminal citations which means they must appear in 15 days, but the majority are operating under the system of contact the violator and send the prosecutor the report and wait and see if they charge.

Interesting. Thank you for the input bigtex!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: bobcat on June 04, 2016, 09:08:56 AM
The information bigtex posted is exactly why I don't believe the story about a call being made to the WDFW and permission being granted to hunt in an area for which the hunter's tag was not valid. If that was the case, the WDFW surely would not have done an investigation and turned it over to the county prosecutor.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: teanawayslayer on June 04, 2016, 09:10:20 AM
On multiple occasions there were phone calls made to these officials. The same ones you said gave out the permission. asking if the case was going to the prosecutors office. End response " we are interviewing a few more people that will make the case rock solid."
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 04, 2016, 09:13:37 AM
On multiple occasions there were phone calls made to these officials. The same ones you said gave out the permission. asking if the case was going to the prosecutors office. End response " we are interviewing a few more people that will make the case rock solid."

Ya, ok  :o
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on June 04, 2016, 09:31:54 AM
I guess the answer on the other end of the line shoulda been a pretty simple no then huh? I mean if some dumb red neck locals must know then surely a professional at f&g must

 Why do you solicit answers to your questions, sometimes twice, and then not read them, are you simply here stirring the pot? :dunno:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: teanawayslayer on June 04, 2016, 09:38:28 AM
On multiple occasions there were phone calls made to these officials. The same ones you said gave out the permission. asking if the case was going to the prosecutors office. End response " we are interviewing a few more people that will make the case rock solid."

Ya, ok  :ok
truth hurts sometimes. You keep referring to this as a witch hunt. Not the case my friend. I'm going to beat a dead horse. South central raffle open in any 300-500 GMu except those units that aren't open the branched antler elk hunting. Not hard to comprehend.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: coachcw on June 04, 2016, 09:38:34 AM
Well only the guy that made the call knows what questions he asked . If they are trying to say they didn't know it was illegal to harvest a bull there they are just pulling wool / the guy that helps him lives there and is a hunter and has hunted other bull tags in the bordering unit.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: HntnFsh on June 04, 2016, 09:46:13 AM
I find it hard to imagine that the locals didn't know the rules to the area as mentioned. Especially this particular rule. I don't find it hard to imagine them saying they didn't know the rules though. Are they that dumb? Or just playing that dumb? My guess would be the latter. Which probably isn't a bad idea given the circumstances!

If the rules on this tag were that clear one would think WDFW would know them. Yet after a call into the them and a call back from then after they researched it they determined it was legal.

So you must have been on 1 end of that call to know exactly what was said by both parties Or are you also making an assumption?

Funny thing about the Internet is you never really know who your talking too. Could be he's making no assumptions at all and was part of that conversation. Could be...

That is why I made that statement. I guess I should have put a question mark at the end of the first sentence though. I would like to see his reply to my question.

All I will say is what I said is 100% factual and no assumptions were made.

For you to be able to make that statement you would have to have been able to, at the very least heard both sides of the conversations of the phone call(s)? Otherwise its just an assumption. So apparently you were directly involved in this whole thing in some way. Or heard recordings of the phone call(s) after the fact.

Must have been an assumption. But its worth a try to pass it off as factual!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 04, 2016, 10:23:07 AM
I find it hard to imagine that the locals didn't know the rules to the area as mentioned. Especially this particular rule. I don't find it hard to imagine them saying they didn't know the rules though. Are they that dumb? Or just playing that dumb? My guess would be the latter. Which probably isn't a bad idea given the circumstances!

If the rules on this tag were that clear one would think WDFW would know them. Yet after a call into the them and a call back from then after they researched it they determined it was legal.

So you must have been on 1 end of that call to know exactly what was said by both parties Or are you also making an assumption?

Funny thing about the Internet is you never really know who your talking too. Could be he's making no assumptions at all and was part of that conversation. Could be...

That is why I made that statement. I guess I should have put a question mark at the end of the first sentence though. I would like to see his reply to my question.

All I will say is what I said is 100% factual and no assumptions were made.

For you to be able to make that statement you would have to have been able to, at the very least heard both sides of the conversations of the phone call(s)? Otherwise its just an assumption. So apparently you were directly involved in this whole thing in some way. Or heard recordings of the phone call(s) after the fact.

Must have been an assumption. But its worth a try to pass it off as factual!

Your right must have been an assumption. Just like I must have assumed the two calls with WDFW were exactly 14 minutes apart......
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on June 04, 2016, 10:30:17 AM
I've deleted all my posts from today, just like I would for anyone else. they were not reasonable and did not express those opinions of the hunting-Washington forum. I apologize.
:hello:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: NOCK NOCK on June 04, 2016, 10:37:40 AM
lord grizzly & kiticaashunter,

Please enlighten us on the context of these supposed phone call(s)

Early on in this thread it was stated that a call was made to WDFW, then a call was received back from WDFW

Now it is sounding like 2 calls were made to WDFW   :dunno:

Were there more than 2 calls made ????
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 04, 2016, 11:15:12 AM
lord grizzly & kiticaashunter,

Please enlighten us on the context of these supposed phone call(s)

Early on in this thread it was stated that a call was made to WDFW, then a call was received back from WDFW

Now it is sounding like 2 calls were made to WDFW   :dunno:

Were there more than 2 calls made ????

It has been talked about on here before. A call was made to the regional office asking about the legality of shooting that bull in that unit with that tag. The officer told them he was going to check with Olympia. 14 minutes later on the second call they were told they would need to use a bow or muzzleloader to harvest that bull under the circumstances.

It's not just now sounding like two calls happened,  this is what actually happened. Many on here talk about "a call", these are the people that don't the facts of the situation and have wildly speculated about what was discussed.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on June 04, 2016, 11:28:09 AM
Hmmmmmm....   

Just got interesting again.

I wonder if those that think they know ALL of the pertinent facts about a situation where they were not present will continue to play internet judge/jury/exrcutioner.

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Dan-o on June 04, 2016, 11:29:41 AM
(I'm betting yes)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: benhuntin on June 04, 2016, 11:30:31 AM
This thread is really taking away from the results thread!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on June 04, 2016, 11:36:22 AM
I'm wondering why the case is even being prosecuted if wdfw gave permission. Why would they even investigate? Is it simply because wdfw really had no legal authority?  Sure would be nice to know the exact wording of the questions and conversation with wdfw. Too bad there isn't anyone in the know responding to this thread to put and end to the speculation. ..........
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on June 04, 2016, 11:41:00 AM
I'm wondering why the case is even being prosecuted if wdfw gave permission. Why would they even investigate? Is it simply because wdfw really had no legal authority?

 Compelling yes?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: kiticaashunter on June 04, 2016, 11:47:01 AM
I'm wondering why the case is even being prosecuted if wdfw gave permission. Why would they even investigate? Is it simply because wdfw really had no legal authority?  Sure would be nice to know the exact wording of the questions and conversation with wdfw. Too bad there isn't anyone in the know responding to this thread to put and end to the speculation. ..........

I think the last thing the WDFW wanted was for this case to get prosecuted.  That was a decision made by the county due to outside pressure they were receiving i believe . As far a the WDFW investigation, to the best of my knowledge not a single person in the party was even interviewed. That seems really strange to me if there truly was a investigation done.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: mfswallace on June 04, 2016, 12:05:00 PM
I'm wondering why the case is even being prosecuted if wdfw gave permission. Why would they even investigate? Is it simply because wdfw really had no legal authority?  Sure would be nice to know the exact wording of the questions and conversation with wdfw. Too bad there isn't anyone in the know responding to this thread to put and end to the speculation. ..........

I think the last thing the WDFW wanted was for this case to get prosecuted.  That was a decision made by the county due to outside pressure they were receiving i believe . As far a the WDFW investigation, to the best of my knowledge not a single person in the party was even interviewed. That seems really strange to me if there truly was a investigation done.

So, who were the people in the party?

Sounds like Wdfw was trying to protect itself from the illegal preferential treatment it gave to this wealthy individual and in so doing helped him on his way to officially becoming a poacher after other shady practice :yike:
At the very least suspensions should be handed out if not termination to those who usurped the "power of the people" who elected the officials who write the laws.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: teanawayslayer on June 04, 2016, 12:19:06 PM
Ok if we're sticking to the facts here is what we know 100% a bull was taken in a closed unit. Permission given by wdfw? Pure speculation. The courts will do the rest to figure out what really went on. Pretty simple really. i think everyone would agree with this statement. Am I wrong?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on June 04, 2016, 01:09:48 PM
On multiple occasions there were phone calls made to these officials. The same ones you said gave out the permission. asking if the case was going to the prosecutors office. End response " we are interviewing a few more people that will make the case rock solid."
I would hate to see a "case building" due to pressure end up with an officer getting Brady'd. Just sayin'.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: HntnFsh on June 04, 2016, 01:23:04 PM
lord grizzly & kiticaashunter,

Please enlighten us on the context of these supposed phone call(s)

Early on in this thread it was stated that a call was made to WDFW, then a call was received back from WDFW

Now it is sounding like 2 calls were made to WDFW   :dunno:

Were there more than 2 calls made ????

It has been talked about on here before. A call was made to the regional office asking about the legality of shooting that bull in that unit with that tag. The officer told them he was going to check with Olympia. 14 minutes later on the second call they were told they would need to use a bow or muzzleloader to harvest that bull under the circumstances.

It's not just now sounding like two calls happened,  this is what actually happened. Many on here talk about "a call", these are the people that don't the facts of the situation and have wildly speculated about what was discussed.
interesting. So was that bull described as a branch antler bull in the questions asked of WDFW during the phone calls?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on June 04, 2016, 02:00:49 PM
Where does it say 334 is closed?  I would still say that if it is not true spike,  it could be argued that there is branch bull hunting.  It would be tough to convict  (for me) given all the circumstances.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on June 04, 2016, 02:26:15 PM
http://wdfw.wa.gov/hunting/regulations/

If you take a look at the regs, no where do they say branched bulls are allowed. Modern firearm is true spike, archery and muzzleloader are spike or antlerless. I don't see any special permits that allow branched bulls....

So, looking at the raffle tag requirements, they shouldn't have even been thinking about that bull (except maybe they were confused as to which GMU they were in. But that doesn't seem likely that they wouldn't know they were in 334).

I'm not sure why I'm even posting here....... :-\
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Blacktail Sniper on June 04, 2016, 02:30:13 PM
Where does it say 334 is closed?  I would still say that if it is not true spike,  it could be argued that there is branch bull hunting.  It would be tough to convict  (for me) given all the circumstances.

Hope this answers your question. Pretty sure these were posted eariler in the thread but are buried way back.

Shots from the 2015 regs covering all three methods of hunting elk, and the raffle page rules for elk. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: NOCK NOCK on June 04, 2016, 02:49:19 PM
lord grizzly & kiticaashunter,

Please enlighten us on the context of these supposed phone call(s)

Early on in this thread it was stated that a call was made to WDFW, then a call was received back from WDFW

Now it is sounding like 2 calls were made to WDFW   :dunno:

Were there more than 2 calls made ????

It has been talked about on here before. A call was made to the regional office asking about the legality of shooting that bull in that unit with that tag. The officer told them he was going to check with Olympia. 14 minutes later on the second call they were told they would need to use a bow or muzzleloader to harvest that bull under the circumstances.

It's not just now sounding like two calls happened,  this is what actually happened. Many on here talk about "a call", these are the people that don't the facts of the situation and have wildly speculated about what was discussed.


1. The ? I was asking was the directions (incoming vs outgoing) of the 2 calls.

2. As far as the phone calls....I don't really care WHAT was discussed, TR knew he could not shoot that bull, to even make that 1st call reeks of a poor attempt to twist the rules in his favor...very un-sportsman like, and definitely not the actions of a person who calls himself a "hunter" (To me, He is just a killer)

3. This right here in bold, from you kiticaashunter, has convinced me 100% that Mr. Reichert and/or his crew are 100% guilty of; 
 
a.  Knowing they could not shoot this animal in 334, thus the call. That is SAD!!! For a guy who has hunted/shot many animals in his lifetime, and calls himself a hunter/sportsman. I agree with JDHasty, HOW COULD YOU CALL YOURSELF A HUNTER and expect this scenario to EVER end well?

b. Being the stereotypical wealthy big game shooter, "Money will buy me everything, and in the end whether right or wrong, ethical or not, fair chase or not, I (___________________) will have the animal that I WANTED hanging on my wall" 

c.  Zero respect from TRUE sportsman who actually hunt



I personally would rather be remembered for being a good guy, not one who twisted things around to get his way, those are the actions of a spoiled child, not a grown man who is supposed to be a sportsman.  :twocents: :twocents:

Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on June 04, 2016, 03:02:08 PM
So if I'm defending I would ask simple yes/no questions.  (Photo from this thread http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php?topic=101806.0)
Is this a branched antler bull?
Is this legal in 334?
Is 334 open to branch bulls?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: fishngamereaper on June 04, 2016, 03:13:39 PM
So if I'm defending I would ask simple yes/no questions.  (Photo from this thread http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php?topic=101806.0)
Is this a branched antler bull?
Is this legal in 334?
Is 334 open to branch bulls?

No
Yes
No
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: chester on June 04, 2016, 03:19:30 PM
So if I'm defending I would ask simple yes/no questions.  (Photo from this thread http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php?topic=101806.0)
Is this a branched antler bull?
Is this legal in 334?
Is 334 open to branch bulls?
No
Yes
No

How is this relevant ? Pretty sure the bull this thread is about had forks above the ears on both sides.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on June 04, 2016, 03:20:18 PM
So if I'm defending I would ask simple yes/no questions.  (Photo from this thread http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php?topic=101806.0)
Is this a branched antler bull?
Is this legal in 334?
Is 334 open to branch bulls?

No
Yes
No
Thats not a branched bull?  I would love to see a jury of six come to agreement on your answers. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on June 04, 2016, 03:23:51 PM
So if I'm defending I would ask simple yes/no questions.  (Photo from this thread http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php?topic=101806.0)
Is this a branched antler bull?
Is this legal in 334?
Is 334 open to branch bulls?
No
Yes
No

How is this relevant ? Pretty sure the bull this thread is about had forks above the ears on both sides.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The department has some more than confusing management schemes that shape the regulations.  WDFW gets what they asked for, a PR nightmare and a bunch of wasted public funds.  I would guess the money spent, from investigation to prosecution nullifies any proceeds from the raffle.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 04, 2016, 03:27:11 PM
So if I'm defending I would ask simple yes/no questions.  (Photo from this thread http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php?topic=101806.0)
Is this a branched antler bull?
Is this legal in 334?
Is 334 open to branch bulls?
No
Yes
No

How is this relevant ? Pretty sure the bull this thread is about had forks above the ears on both sides.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The relevance is there's a bull with branching antler that would be legal to harvest in that unit since it's not a true spike unit. Yes it's a fine print argument but couple it with the go ahead from olimpia and you've got a case a good lawyer can win. Pretty sure that's where Tbar is going with it.  Correct me if I'm wrong tbar
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on June 04, 2016, 03:32:52 PM
It's a case that should not even be tried in my opinion.  What I would like is clarity from a department that can't answer (definitively) many questions about their own rules and regulations.  This same scenario has played out before and should have played out on another 2015 hunt.  The department doesn't know their own rules, how can they expect ANYONE else(except JD) to definitively understand them.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 04, 2016, 03:33:02 PM
So if I'm defending I would ask simple yes/no questions.  (Photo from this thread http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php?topic=101806.0)
Is this a branched antler bull?
Is this legal in 334?
Is 334 open to branch bulls?
No
Yes
No

How is this relevant ? Pretty sure the bull this thread is about had forks above the ears on both sides.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The department has some more than confusing management schemes that shape the regulations.  WDFW gets what they asked for, a PR nightmare and a bunch of wasted public funds.  I would guess the money spent, from investigation to prosecution nullifies any proceeds from the raffle.

That's a good point. But hey, at least there not spending it on wolves
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on June 04, 2016, 03:35:02 PM
What is WDFW's definition of a spike bull and what is their definition of a branch antlered bull? By definition, I'm pretty sure that bull in the picture is  a spike.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on June 04, 2016, 03:35:49 PM
I don't know the tag holder in any way shape or form, but feel the only thing he should get from the WDFW is an apology.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: fishngamereaper on June 04, 2016, 03:37:03 PM
So if I'm defending I would ask simple yes/no questions.  (Photo from this thread http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php?topic=101806.0)
Is this a branched antler bull?
Is this legal in 334?
Is 334 open to branch bulls?

No
Yes
No
Thats not a branched bull?  I would love to see a jury of six come to agreement on your answers.

If you killed that bull in 334 you going to call it a 5 by 2 or a spike by 5 . By definition its a legal spike. Calling it a branched antler bull for the sake of trying to justify hunting branched bulls in 334 is just trying to twist the wording in the regs to suit the hunting needs of one individual.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on June 04, 2016, 03:38:42 PM
What is WDFW's definition of a spike bull and what is their definition of a branch antlered bull? By definition, I'm pretty sure that bull in the picture is  a spike.
Jackalope, it's definitely a fine print and interpretation  argument.  That does not take away from it's validity.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 04, 2016, 03:40:30 PM
So if I'm defending I would ask simple yes/no questions.  (Photo from this thread http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php?topic=101806.0)
Is this a branched antler bull?
Is this legal in 334?
Is 334 open to branch bulls?

No
Yes
No
Thats not a branched bull?  I would love to see a jury of six come to agreement on your answers.

If you killed that bull in 334 you going to call it a 5 by 2 or a spike by 5 . By definition its a legal spike. Calling it a branched antler bull for the sake of trying to justify hunting branched bulls in 334 is just trying to twist the wording in the regs to suit the hunting needs of one individual.


You may have just explained it the best on how unclear the regs and peramiters of the raffle tag are. The way there written could not even been interpreted by the department that wrote them, thus the situation we have here. Just as clear as mud
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JLS on June 04, 2016, 03:41:16 PM
This thread has reached the level of a bad case of gonorrhea, with a side case of herpes.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: RELV on June 04, 2016, 03:43:16 PM
That Bull in the picture is also legal in a 3PT or better area, like GMU 652.  So, I would call it a branch antlered Bull and not a spike.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 04, 2016, 03:46:12 PM
This thread has reached the level of a bad case of gonorrhea, with a side case of herpes.

How does this add to the thread. I e seen a few posts taken down in the short time I've been on here and even had one of mine edited. This should come down . It's far more offensive than what's already been taken down
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on June 04, 2016, 03:51:51 PM
This thread has reached the level of a bad case of gonorrhea, with a side case of herpes.
JLS maybe you can provide clarity?  How do you quantify your analysis?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: teanawayslayer on June 04, 2016, 04:08:36 PM
So if I'm defending I would ask simple yes/no questions.  (Photo from this thread http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php?topic=101806.0)
Is this a branched antler bull?
Is this legal in 334?
Is 334 open to branch bulls?

No
Yes
No
Thats not a branched bull?  I would love to see a jury of six come to agreement on your answers.

If you killed that bull in 334 you going to call it a 5 by 2 or a spike by 5 . By definition its a legal spike. Calling it a branched antler bull for the sake of trying to justify hunting branched bulls in 334 is just trying to twist the wording in the regs to suit the hunting needs of one individual.


You may have just explained it the best on how unclear the regs and peramiters of the raffle tag are. The way there written could not even been interpreted by the department that wrote them, thus the situation we have here. Just as clear as mud
its not hard to figure out at all. We all abide by the same rules if not we face the penalty of the law. Ignorance is bliss.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on June 04, 2016, 04:11:56 PM
So if I'm defending I would ask simple yes/no questions.  (Photo from this thread http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php?topic=101806.0)
Is this a branched antler bull?
Is this legal in 334?
Is 334 open to branch bulls?

No
Yes
No
Thats not a branched bull?  I would love to see a jury of six come to agreement on your answers.

If you killed that bull in 334 you going to call it a 5 by 2 or a spike by 5 . By definition its a legal spike. Calling it a branched antler bull for the sake of trying to justify hunting branched bulls in 334 is just trying to twist the wording in the regs to suit the hunting needs of one individual.

I covered that topic in depth yesterday and a bull elk must be able to be defined as a spike in GMU 334 in order to be legal.  By default then GMU 334 is not open for branched antler elk
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JLS on June 04, 2016, 04:14:36 PM
This thread has reached the level of a bad case of gonorrhea, with a side case of herpes.
JLS maybe you can provide clarity?  How do you quantify your analysis?

Because at this point it has gravitated to a continued back and forth of hypotheticals, allegations, and pictures of bull elk that have no direct bearing on the case at hand.  It's continued speculation about a telephone conversation when we know full well that the other party isn't going to take part in the conversation.  All of this will come out, under oath, in a courtroom.  To continue to speculate and make one sided allegations is ridiculous.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on June 04, 2016, 04:22:51 PM
I was hoping you could provide legal clarity (rcw, wac,case law).
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JLS on June 04, 2016, 04:25:11 PM
I was hoping you could provide legal clarity (rcw, wac,case law).

for what?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on June 04, 2016, 04:28:52 PM
Something that would definitively say that 334 would not be a huntable unit to auction/raffle tag holders.  I just don't think it's as cut and dry (illegal) as many (not you) are claiming. I apologize if the spike pic has zero meaning to this thread.  Mods feel free to delete.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on June 04, 2016, 04:31:09 PM
So if I'm defending I would ask simple yes/no questions.  (Photo from this thread http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php?topic=101806.0)
Is this a branched antler bull?
Is this legal in 334?
Is 334 open to branch bulls?

No
Yes
No
Thats not a branched bull?  I would love to see a jury of six come to agreement on your answers.
trying to justify hunting branched bulls in 334 is just trying to twist the wording in the regs to suit the hunting needs of one individual.

 +1
Title: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on June 04, 2016, 04:37:07 PM
What is WDFW's definition of a spike bull and what is their definition of a branch antlered bull? By definition, I'm pretty sure that bull in the picture is  a spike.
Jackalope, it's definitely a fine print and interpretation  argument.  That does not take away from it's validity.


Per the reg's, page 52, GMU 334 is a true spike unit.

http://wdfw.wa.gov/publications/01712/wdfw01712.pdf

(https://hunting-washington.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fuploads.tapatalk-cdn.com%2F20160604%2F07eb6bba7fb845a4d7091cc0f8c0f299.jpg&hash=d7ce4c448ec6460dd6301005759fdcf3)

(https://hunting-washington.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fuploads.tapatalk-cdn.com%2F20160604%2F6258c0e5d816bcee872ac56d674deca8.jpg&hash=096d141863672c012d2f340c824ada7a)

(https://hunting-washington.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fuploads.tapatalk-cdn.com%2F20160604%2Ffcb0f34e7314e9075f4e8cd6c2673433.jpg&hash=8c0c236f87397c8f4838e42744a634a1)

With all due respect, please explain to me how that could possibly, ever, in a month of Sunday's, be a matter of interpretation. 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on June 04, 2016, 04:38:51 PM
That Bull in the picture is also legal in a 3PT or better area, like GMU 652.  So, I would call it a branch antlered Bull and not a spike.

This was not 652. Or any other gmu where 3 point Bulls are even a consideration.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Pinetar on June 04, 2016, 04:39:31 PM
NO According to WDFW and the regs it is a spike. Refer to page 49 in regs if you don't understand and are confused of the difference. Theirs some really cool pics to look at as well.

True Spike Bull Restrictions: Bull elk taken in
these units (GMUs 251, 328-335) must
have both antlers with no branching
originating more than four inches above
where the antlers attach to the skull

Riechert's Bull clearly has branching on both antlers that are more than 4 inches above his skull.

NO It is illegal to shoot a 1x5 in 334 with any weapon and all seasons except with a bow during Sept. archery season.

NO AGAIN!!! Again, you can shoot that 1x5 spike with a bow during Sept. archery season but if you shoot a 2x2 or larger with any weapon or any tag it becomes illegal as it would clearly become a branched bull by looking at or reading the regs.

334 is TRUE SPIKE ONLY (meaning 1x1) EXCEPT SEPT ARCHERY where you can legally shoot a 1x?

I can't find anywhere in the regs where it is legal to shoot a branched bull (meaning 2x2 or larger) in Unit 334. If I am missing something, PLEASE show me! To me the regs are not confusing at all on this subject.

TBar- In your eyes is unit 334 True Spike or not? In your eyes can you legally shoot that 1x5 in 334 with a muzzy or rifle?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Tbar on June 04, 2016, 04:40:38 PM
So they should be pursuing charges on every non true spike taken in archery and muzzy.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on June 04, 2016, 04:40:59 PM
Something that would definitively say that 334 would not be a huntable unit to auction/raffle tag holders.

 The regs clearly say that raffle tag is valid in any unit for that region until the end of the year, except those GMU's closed to elk hunting or closed to branch antlered bull elk hunting

 Definitive to everyone not looking for some way, any way, to justify killing that bull. :dunno:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on June 04, 2016, 04:42:17 PM
Jackalope, in the 2015 Game Regs it is listed on P51 a Spike or antlerless for the Archery General
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on June 04, 2016, 04:43:45 PM
So they should be pursuing charges on every non true spike taken in archery and muzzy.

 I can appreciate your need for a clear understanding Tbar, but this has absolutely nothing to do with this thread or situation. ;)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JDHasty on June 04, 2016, 04:44:36 PM
NO According to WDFW and the regs it is a spike. Refer to page 49 in regs if you don't understand and are confused of the difference. Theirs some really cool pics to look at as well.

True Spike Bull Restrictions: Bull elk taken in
these units (GMUs 251, 328-335) must
have both antlers with no branching
originating more than four inches above
where the antlers attach to the skull

Riechert's Bull clearly has branching on both antlers that are more than 4 inches above his skull.

NO It is illegal to shoot a 1x5 in 334 with any weapon and all seasons except with a bow during Sept. archery season.

NO AGAIN!!! Again, you can shoot that 1x5 spike with a bow during Sept. archery season but if you shoot a 2x2 or larger with any weapon or any tag it becomes illegal as it would clearly become a branched bull by looking at or reading the regs.

334 is TRUE SPIKE ONLY (meaning 1x1) EXCEPT SEPT ARCHERY where you can legally shoot a 1x?

I can't find anywhere in the regs where it is legal to shoot a branched bull (meaning 2x2 or larger) in Unit 334. If I am missing something, PLEASE show me! To me the regs are not confusing at all on this subject.

TBar- In your eyes is unit 334 True Spike or not? In your eyes can you legally shoot that 1x5 in 334 with a muzzy or rifle?


What you are saying is a stone cold natural fact! 
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 04, 2016, 04:49:31 PM
Don't forget guys if your not clear on any regulations you can always call fish and game and ask....oh wait ....
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on June 04, 2016, 04:50:25 PM
Don't forget guys if your not clear on any regulations you can always call fish and game and ask....oh wait ....
:chuckle:

 Sadly this is true in more ways than one, WDFG was reliable as I remember it, WDFW not so much!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: teanawayslayer on June 04, 2016, 05:00:56 PM
Something that would definitively say that 334 would not be a huntable unit to auction/raffle tag holders.  I just don't think it's as cut and dry (illegal) as many (not you) are claiming. I apologize if the spike pic has zero meaning to this thread.  Mods feel free to delete.
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: teanawayslayer on June 04, 2016, 05:01:45 PM
Pretty simple
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: huntnphool on June 04, 2016, 05:03:24 PM
Pretty simple

  :chuckle: It would seem!
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on June 04, 2016, 05:04:14 PM
Jackalope, in the 2015 Game Regs it is listed on P51 a Spike or antlerless for the Archery General

(https://hunting-washington.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fuploads.tapatalk-cdn.com%2F20160605%2F2e45664d8e723e64f4cc716fd827ef2c.jpg&hash=ead76fe9e2feb31d15fc76c2863d9e61)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 04, 2016, 05:05:02 PM
Your absolutely right phool that is an important distinction to make. That G changing to a W had more reprocutions than I'd say most hunters realize.
Title: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on June 04, 2016, 05:06:12 PM
Let's try it this way. It is a spike unit, even if it's not a true spike unit, even though it clearly states it is a true spike unit.
Definition of a Spike:

(https://hunting-washington.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fuploads.tapatalk-cdn.com%2F20160605%2F74df0cbff6549e800a8901c58bb901b4.jpg&hash=dfe34b32eabc7985bbc7c91346164b1b)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: lord grizzly on June 04, 2016, 05:07:34 PM
Isn't it not a true spike unit for archery?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: Curly on June 04, 2016, 05:13:37 PM
If 334 were open for branch bulls, is there anyone that believes that bull would have been alive for the raffle tag holder to take?
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: JimmyHoffa on June 04, 2016, 05:14:22 PM
using those spike bull definitions all one has to do is wait until the bull lowers his head far enough down such that the antlers are no longer 'above' the ear.  :rolleyes:
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: jackelope on June 04, 2016, 05:14:54 PM
(https://hunting-washington.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fuploads.tapatalk-cdn.com%2F20160605%2F4123fe9d09cce47cd3ce4b9ca26eaae7.jpg&hash=704a1429bb4537456f9f2cad09de84cf)
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bullwinkle
Post by: NOCK NOCK on June 04, 2016, 06:18:49 PM
If 334 were open for branch bulls, is there anyone that believes that bull would have been alive for the raffle tag holder to take?


BINGO

 :tup: :tup:   Good one Curly
Title: Re: Hunter facing charges after death of beloved elk named Bul