Drone harrassment...

[Gunitharvester]

Posting for a buddy: He was deer hunting in the north Puget Sound area the last days of Late Modern season, when someone on the road above him (200 yards or so up hill from him) flew a drone up and over the clear cut he was hunting next to...... Then it flew his direction and stopped about "40-50 feet" from him and hovered back and forth around him for about "7-8 minutes" before he got fed up and left.  By the time he got up to the road he was parked on (same road as where the drone came from) the vehicle, drone, and guy flying it were long gone. The first thing I said was "YOU SHOULD HAVE SHOT IT!!!" He said he almost did but decided that they would have slashed his tires by the time he got back to his rig.... He's probably right.

Input? Anyone else experience something like this? Legalities???
 

-Thanks in advance

[1bugman]

That sucks, no advice but I'm interested in the responses

[ghosthunter]

I felt threatened by the dang flying thing, officers.

[The scout]

he had better hope it was coated in Kevlar if that thing was buzzing around me

[Bob33]

Report it.
http://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=77.15.210

RCW 77.15.210

Obstructing the taking of fish, shellfish, or wildlife—Penalty.

(1) A person is guilty of obstructing the taking of fish[, shellfish,] or wildlife if the person:

(a) Harasses, drives, or disturbs fish, shellfish, or wildlife with the intent of disrupting lawful pursuit or taking thereof; or

(b) Harasses, intimidates, or interferes with an individual engaged in the lawful taking of fish, shellfish, or wildlife or lawful predator control with the intent of disrupting lawful pursuit or taking thereof.

[bigtex]

Report it.
http://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=77.15.210

RCW 77.15.210

Obstructing the taking of fish, shellfish, or wildlife—Penalty.

(1) A person is guilty of obstructing the taking of fish[, shellfish,] or wildlife if the person:

(a) Harasses, drives, or disturbs fish, shellfish, or wildlife with the intent of disrupting lawful pursuit or taking thereof; or

(b) Harasses, intimidates, or interferes with an individual engaged in the lawful taking of fish, shellfish, or wildlife or lawful predator control with the intent of disrupting lawful pursuit or taking thereof.

The big problem with WA's "hunter harassment" law is the intent requirement.

WDFW (and later the prosecutor) would have to prove that the drone operator harassed/interfered with a hunter WITH THE INTENT of disrupting the lawful hunt.

A two day old defense attorney could quickly say his defendant didn't even know the individual he was flying the drone by was hunting and thus didn't know/intend on disrupting the hunt.

[Bean Counter]

I'm far less likely to give a drone a dirt nap if i'm out hunting as opposed to it flying over my back  yard, esp if my kids are playing outside.

[The scout]

7-8 mins of hovering, don't think it's getting a pass

[Bean Counter]

Well, I personally like being left alone while hunting as much as the next guy, but destroying something worth $1,000+  is not to be done lightly. I'd probably leave it alone if it were a hundred yards above. If it was 2 feet from my head it would be an easy shot with my .40 

[Bob33]

Report it.
http://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=77.15.210

RCW 77.15.210

Obstructing the taking of fish, shellfish, or wildlife—Penalty.

(1) A person is guilty of obstructing the taking of fish[, shellfish,] or wildlife if the person:

(a) Harasses, drives, or disturbs fish, shellfish, or wildlife with the intent of disrupting lawful pursuit or taking thereof; or

(b) Harasses, intimidates, or interferes with an individual engaged in the lawful taking of fish, shellfish, or wildlife or lawful predator control with the intent of disrupting lawful pursuit or taking thereof.

The big problem with WA's "hunter harassment" law is the intent requirement.

WDFW (and later the prosecutor) would have to prove that the drone operator harassed/interfered with a hunter WITH THE INTENT of disrupting the lawful hunt.

A two day old defense attorney could quickly say his defendant didn't even know the individual he was flying the drone by was hunting and thus didn't know/intend on disrupting the hunt.

Once - of course it could be a mistake. I would think if it was an established pattern (i.e. he'd been involved in doing it before) there would be enough justification for making the charge stick.

[jeffro]

"YOU SHOULD HAVE SHOT IT!!!" He said he almost did but decided that they would have slashed his tires by the time he got back to his rig.... He's probably right.
Input?

This is why I put up cameras at my truck when I leave it in the woods.
Too many dou::: b::: out there
At least I should get a license number of anyone messing with my gear.

[full strutting]

Shoot the worthless drone to pieces. Was threatening your life, seems to work


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JimmyHoffa]

WDFW biologists out doing grouse surveys? 

[724wd]

WDFW biologists out doing grouse surveys? 

 

[Yakirack]

Who do you recommend reporting this type of thing to?