Laelkhunter
Well-known member
Must have the same lawyer OJ had.
Spike vs. Branch Antlered Bull. Do you know the difference?
- Thread starter windymtnman
- Start date
After reading a few articles on this, theres a couple different stories. The only article that says he moved the animal is in the linked article. Being on the outside we dont get the full story. We do know this serial poacher was on a Governors type tag. We do know the unit only allows spikes. We also know the lawyer got him off on a technicality. Without having ever applied for a governors tag, I dont know the rules that go along with the tag. So could there be an issue with the governors tag trumping the normal rules regarding legal animal for that unit. I wonder if things were lost in translation and that be gray area. At least that might be what I would have argued.
The guy is still a POS
The guy is still a POS
bobbydean
Well-known member
Not condoning anything, but I thought with a Governor's tag you could hunt anywhere.
Gray area. I do not know.
Also, do Governor's tag requirements vary from state to state?
Gray area. I do not know.
Also, do Governor's tag requirements vary from state to state?
Last edited:
Little Big Man MT Chris
Well-known member
i still think the fact he choose to move that elk before gutting it is a clear indicator he knew in his heart he was in the wrong.
I've read numerous other articles. More legitimate sources never said anything about moving the animal. Not saying he didn't move it, but I'm not going to take that as fact. The linked article says the charges were dropped....yet the judge made a ruling. So which is it?
Little Big Man MT Chris
Well-known member
The article that was posted to start the thread said the animal was transported from a spike unit to a bull unit to be field dressed
The elk was transported from GMU 334 to GMU 228 before being gutted.
A more important question is: What motivates people to defend someone who has shown a proclivity to wantonly flaunt the Game Regulations? Particularly when, in the words of his accomplice: This animal was a neighborhood pet and shooting him was likely to spark outrage. (that is a paraphrase)
For God's sake, in all honesty, can anyone lay out a scenario in which this escapade was ever going to "end well?"
Thankfully, although the vast majority of hunters who have been discussing this incident, either online or at our local Rod & Gun clubs, recognized how this act could reflect negatively on all hunters - that has not come to pass. Sportsmen were on-board early and almost unanimous in their condemnation, months before the story showed up in the Seattle Times, and irrespective of how you feel about the legacy media, when the story came to the attention of folks beyond the Kittitas valley, sportsmen were given recognition for being outraged over the recklessness of this act.
bobbydean
Well-known member
I asked if the Governor tag allows you to hunt anywhere. In New Mexico, I think that is true. I did not see any support for the hunter, only questions.
As a first time poster, read the posts.
As a first time poster, read the posts.
ShootsManyBullets
Well-known member
Well that Brittany looks like she could be a good huntin' pardner for someone here
Little Big Man MT Chris
Well-known member
Ha ha ha ha ha, someone's thinking bout hunting sumthin !!
Last edited:
That's all I was questioning. Mainly because I can't believe there could be a discrepancy on branch vs spike. I was looking for the Washington game and fish report and couldn't find it. Moving the animal is only referenced from 1 report and others ran with it. Enough articles out there make no mention of moving the animal that I wonder if that happened.
I still think this guy is a turd for shooting a semi-domestic animal to begin with so I'm definitely not defending him.
squirrel
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2013
- Messages
- 709
and you people find ANY of this surprising??? Standard procedure on these tags, the only surprising thing is a ticket was written... We nip this a bit higher on the branch in CO and call of the dogs before ink even hits paper, much neater overall. WA should take note and up its game if it produces bulls of this caliber/value
For God's sake, in all honesty, can anyone lay out a scenario in which this escapade was ever going to "end well?"
Thankfully, although the vast majority of hunters who have been discussing this incident, either online or at our local Rod & Gun clubs, recognized how this act could reflect negatively on all hunters - thankfully that has not come to pass.
Sportsmen were on-board early and almost unanimous in their criticism, months before the story showed up in the Seattle Times, and irrespective of how you feel about the legacy media, when the story came to the attention of folks beyond the Kittitas valley, sportsmen were given recognition for being outraged over the recklessness of this act.
If you go online and read the comments that have been posted, it is "trophy hunters," who participate in the Auction Tag opportunities, who people are coming down hard on. And, that really isn't fair either. Is it?
I don't participate in the Auction Tag opportunities, but I know many who do and one of those who does, I know very well. I call him a friend.
Almost all of them would never dream of pulling a stunt like this and this puts them in a spotlight that they almost all go to great lengths to avoid.
Oh, I am not saying that they don't like to bask in the glory of their hunting accomplishments when among peers, but by and large they just want to be left alone to pursue their passion of hunting and to derive a bit of pleasure from being able to take advantage of the recognition that most sportsmen willingly give to those who open their wallet up so that we all have more opportunity to pursue big game.
Hey, those of you who object across the board to us giving them this opportunity, as a big THANK YOU recognition for being the high bidder, come down off your high horse and understand that without the money these "high net worth" individuals give, we would all be poorer and knock off the bashing of those who could buy acreage for their exclusive use, or go hunting in Alaska or Africa, or whatever.
And, make absolutely no mistake about it, that is how the VAST majority of Auction winners see it. We give them something extra special as recognition for their generosity, and they recognize how blessed they are to be able and to have been to be a part in that give and take. And they act accordingly.
Most all who participate in these opportunities are not people you simply can just go out and paint almost almost all of them as being "usual suspects." They are good and honorable people who truly want to "give back," and they do give back. Big time. We, as sportsmen support their generosity by giving them recognition in a way that we know they will truly appreciate, but that does not mean that they get free hand to decide that what we offered "was not enough" to compensate them for their largess.
There are restrictions placed on these Tag opportunities. Very few restrictions. And they are not a big encumbrance to them bagging an extraordinary bull. But c'mon, these opportunities are not license to spit in our eye and go hog wild and see what you can get away with. And almost all recognize this and act accordingly.
Be fair.
Last edited:
MooseCaboose
Active member
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2014
- Messages
- 500
No appeals available to the prosecution thanks to Double Jeopardy protection of the 5th amendment
MooseCaboose
Active member
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2014
- Messages
- 500
The charges were dismissed by the judge because his governor's tag allowed the hunter to hunt any unit in the 300 or 500 except those closed to branch antlered bull hunting, but the term branch antlered bull is not defined in the Washington Regulations. Because of this lack of definition, a defintion had to be constructed based on other terms that were defined in the regulations. The derived branch antler bull definition:
"a male elk with a horn-like growth that has any projection off the main antler that is at least on inch long and is longer than it is wide."
GMU 334, where the bull was killed, was categorized as a "true spike bull" area, a term which means:
"a bull elk that has both antlers with no branching originating more than four inches above where the antlers attach to the skull."
It may or may not be obvious at first, but these definitions do indeed overlap. As the judge points out, the season was open to harvest a bull with branched antlers as long as the branches were less than four inches from the base of the antler.
I know what you're thinking, how is it possible that branch antlered bull and spike bull definitions overlap? Lack of foresight into the need to explicitly define a branch antlered bull precisely.
To be sure, this is a technical legal argument. But apparently, it was a convincing one, at least that day.
read the decision here: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3480333-Bullwinkle-Ruling.html
squirrel
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2013
- Messages
- 709
JDHasty;25931 can anyone lay out a scenario in which this escapade was ever going to "end well?" No so if the game cannot end well why agree to play it?? ( ahh yes the $) If you go online and read the comments that have been posted said:
Steelhead
Active member
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2009
- Messages
- 701
Whatever. Basically dude paid a ton of money to shoot a high fence bull. Friggin moron coulda bought 5 bigger ones at a ranch...there's no difference.
Some awesome information there. I'll read the court documents when I get more time. Did they mention moving the animal? And while it may have been legal to harvest a branch antlered bull. It's pretty obvious that the animal clearly had those branches longer than 4 inches off the main beam.
"The charges were dismissed by the judge because his governor's tag allowed the hunter to hunt any unit in the 300 or 500 except those closed to branch antlered bull hunting"
Actually this bull was tagged w/the South Central Big Game Raffle Tag. Irrespective of which tag he used the restriction says the tag is good for any unit in the 300 or 500 except those not opened by the Fish & Game Commission for branched antler elk hunting. Since the defense wants to get technical about the wording... the Fish & Game Commission did not take the affirmative action of opening the unit, or any other 300 or 500 series Unit for that matter, to branched antler elk hunting.
And yes this can be appealed. They have 30 days
Actually this bull was tagged w/the South Central Big Game Raffle Tag. Irrespective of which tag he used the restriction says the tag is good for any unit in the 300 or 500 except those not opened by the Fish & Game Commission for branched antler elk hunting. Since the defense wants to get technical about the wording... the Fish & Game Commission did not take the affirmative action of opening the unit, or any other 300 or 500 series Unit for that matter, to branched antler elk hunting.
And yes this can be appealed. They have 30 days
Last edited:
Regardless of the wording, were all certain this dude knows the difference between a branch and a spike. I was questioning the reports because theres just no way that makes a solid defense. Even if their was a discrepancy the guy has been "hunting" long enough to know the difference. He just doesn't care. It's interesting they've played the "he's an old man with cancer" card. Even if he is, that doesn't make his actions just.
