My light project

[LBrown59]

I have motion detector lights all over the place as well as several lights that are on timers.
Frankly I couldn't care less what the DNR might think of them.

Larry, To what do you refer? Are you commenting on the bit about deer setting off my security lights?

I have 3 IR motion detector coach light style porch lights on the front porch. Wildlife are always setting off one or more of them. Some nights it is a veritable light show, with them going off in sequence over and over as some warm blooded animals walks along the porch. This is often raccoons but we have had deer within a few feet of the porch too.

Wouldn't this be considered wildlife harassing people?

Pat

 

[mopacman]

I am talking about going out in the woods and spotlighting deer

 

[ctjstr]

Don't EVEN start on that spotlighting stuff. I actually had to argue one of those spotlighting cases in the Washington State Supreme court...and lost. What a waste of energy.

for anyone with absolutely nothing better to do, you can find it in Washington STate case law at:

123 Wn.2d 741, STATE v. WALSH
I think it was back in 1994 sometime.

 

[patrick_g]

Don't EVEN start on that spotlighting stuff. I actually had to argue one of those spotlighting cases in the Washington State Supreme court...and lost. What a waste of energy.

So, please drop the other shoe...

Were you intentionally using a spot light on deer?

Were you armed?

I understand mopacman's frustration when some of us don't see spotlighting deer as such a clear cut yes you is or no you ain't situation.

I have been known to do some wildlife photography, above and beyond the casual snapshot or stealth cam on a game trail. Depending on circumstances I might be armed but not with a proper weapon for deer, but instead a pistol loaded with snake shot plus up to 40-50 lbs of photo gear.

Maybe the laws are written too loosely, requiring too much interpretation and giving the enforcement personnel and courts too much leeway to make it up as they go.

Surely the distinction between an unarmed (or nearly so with respect to deer) person lighting up deer to take a video or to show them to the kids vs person(s) with hunting arms in their possession lighting up deer is not such a fine one as to be indistinguishable, even by a casual observer.

I realize I employed the "argument of the beard" when I asked about the duration of a photoflash but I thought it appropriate.

Note: the argument of the beard is... If I have one fairly long hair on my chin is it a beard? Many or likely most will say no. How about 2 hairs, or 3 or 4 or... At some point most folks will call it a beard.

How long must my photo light sourcer be on before it is "spotlighting" a deer. 1/20,000 of a second? 1/10 second? 1 second or 10 sec?

I guess my basic "bone of contention" is that if I am not armed and have no armed confederate(s) then what difference does it make if I light up a deer? How is it more criminal than my headlights lighting up a deer standing next to the road as I drive by?

I would be content if the law required the "criminal" to have a weapon at hand (in hand, in vehicle, or nearby) AND to light up the deer. Then you would be legal if you had no weapon.

I guess it calls into question the purpose of the law. Is it to 1. prevent illegal hunting/poaching or to 2. somehow protect the animals nocturnal habits from being observed?

If the former (1.) then clearly no weapon so no crime as it is unlikely that a person will startle a deer with a bright light and then before the animal recovers jump on it and kill it bare handed. If the latter (2.) is the intent of the law then PETA and it mush minded fellow travelers have gone too far beyond reason once again.

Pat

 

[ctjstr]

So, please drop the other shoe...

Were you intentionally using a spot light on deer?

Were you armed?

I understand mopacman's frustration when some of us don't see spotlighting deer as such a clear cut yes you is or no you ain't situation.

I have been known to do some wildlife photography, above and beyond the casual snapshot or stealth cam on a game trail. Depending on circumstances I might be armed but not with a proper weapon for deer, but instead a pistol loaded with snake shot plus up to 40-50 lbs of photo gear.

Maybe the laws are written too loosely, requiring too much interpretation and giving the enforcement personnel and courts too much leeway to make it up as they go.

Surely the distinction between an unarmed (or nearly so with respect to deer) person lighting up deer to take a video or to show them to the kids vs person(s) with hunting arms in their possession lighting up deer is not such a fine one as to be indistinguishable, even by a casual observer.

I realize I employed the "argument of the beard" when I asked about the duration of a photoflash but I thought it appropriate.

Note: the argument of the beard is... If I have one fairly long hair on my chin is it a beard? Many or likely most will say no. How about 2 hairs, or 3 or 4 or... At some point most folks will call it a beard.

How long must my photo light sourcer be on before it is "spotlighting" a deer. 1/20,000 of a second? 1/10 second? 1 second or 10 sec?

I guess my basic "bone of contention" is that if I am not armed and have no armed confederate(s) then what difference does it make if I light up a deer? How is it more criminal than my headlights lighting up a deer standing next to the road as I drive by?

I would be content if the law required the "criminal" to have a weapon at hand (in hand, in vehicle, or nearby) AND to light up the deer. Then you would be legal if you had no weapon.

I guess it calls into question the purpose of the law. Is it to 1. prevent illegal hunting/poaching or to 2. somehow protect the animals nocturnal habits from being observed?

If the former (1.) then clearly no weapon so no crime as it is unlikely that a person will startle a deer with a bright light and then before the animal recovers jump on it and kill it bare handed. If the latter (2.) is the intent of the law then PETA and it mush minded fellow travelers have gone too far beyond reason once again.

Pat

O.K. the deal I was involved in was totally different. My client was coming home from hunting and as he came down a dirt road, his headlights caught sight of a large deer rack. He pulled over and stopped, got out of his car, grabbed his unloaded rifle with a light gathering scope, looked through it at the deer, put his rifle away, got in his truck and kept driving. He was stopped the the game guys and charged with spotlighting. As it turned out, the 'deer' was actually a game department decoy; essentially a set of deer horns on a stick, stuck in the ground behind some bushes.

My argument was that he was not "hunting", since he had no ammunition in the rifle, plus he could not have been hunting game, since a deer on a stick isn't game. Didn't get very far with those arguments.

Washington Law currently is:

77.15.450. Spotlighting big game--Penalty
(1) A person is guilty of spotlighting big game in the second degree if the person hunts big game with the aid of a spotlight, other artificial light, or night vision equipment while in possession or control of a firearm, bow and arrow, or cross bow. For purposes of this section, "night vision equipment" includes electronic light amplification devices, thermal imaging devices, and other comparable equipment used to enhance night vision.

 

[Mech]

Thanks for this post. Based on you idea I just put lights on my JD790, mounted on the front of my Canopy. My tractor lights now look insignificant when I turn these new lights on. They are also not blocked when I lift the front blade. It will be a major help when plowing our next big snow.

 

[patrick_g]

I can see the states point of view. It is no leap of imagination to see how easily a cartridge could be put into the gun.

As proclaimed in an earlier post, he could have been arrested even if he had no gun and used binoculars to check out the sighting. That seems super stupid to me.

In the case described, the officers had no way of knowing for sure if the gun was loaded or not as the owner could have unloaded it subsequently but prior to being stopped. Maybe he should invest in a pair of binoculars and put the rifle in the trunk when not legally hunting

The argument made was certainly logical but apparently that is not the issue. The law, as written is clear on the necessary and sufficient conditions that when met constitute spotlighting big game.

If you 1. have a gun in your possession and 2. you shine a light on big game then you are guilty of hunting big game by spotlighting. I think the law could be worded better.

So apparently I can use any light I want on big game in Washington if I don't have a gun. My baby Glock in .45ACP loaded with snake shot would get me busted for big game hunting. Really dumb!

I too have work lights fore and aft on my tractor in addition to low and high beam headlights.

I typically am armed so if a deer gets in my tractor lights I may be a criminal. Same story for car lights. Dang, I am a regular scoff law.

Dang me, dang me, take me to a tree and hang me.

Pat

 

[gemini5362]

Wow pat and to think this all came out of someone talking about the great job he did putting lights on his tractor.

Personally I am of the opinion if a game warden wants to arrest me for spotlighting if a deer jumps out in front of my tractor lights then let them arrest me. I will ask for a jury trial and let a jury of my fellow residents make that decision. Then let the prosecuting attorney explain that to his constituents when election time rolls around. This reminds me of a conversation I had with a young (emphasis on young) game warden at a home show they had a booth at. We were talking about being out in the woods during deer season without having orange on. I pointed out that they were my woods if I was on my property. His reply was that if you had a gun you were hunting and had to have orange. I asked what if I had a 22 for shooting poisonous snakes. The reply to that was I had better make sure that the snakes were in season. When I quit laughing I decided to just go to the next booth. Most of the older game wardens where I live are pretty savvy they have a job to do and they do it with common sense.

Back to the original post. If you made something like they have on truck mirrors that allows the lights to push back when they hit something that might make them last a bit longer when there is an issue with hitting brush.

Pat If I remember correctly your kubota has a cab on it. Did it not come with lights my inexpensive Montana has lights on the front and the back of the cab.

 

[patrick_g]

Right Thomas, my lil Kubby has a cab and came with lights fore and aft, bank switched front and rear separately from the low/high beam headlights and or running lights. They have separately secured two axis swivel, left/right and up/down. They are not "swing away" and can take a beating when I run through some limbs. So far the worst damage has been misalignment and pulling the plug-in wires loose so I have to plug them in again. Better to pull the connectors apart than to do something that requires more extensive reparations.

Were your ears burning Saturday? I was talking to a new neighbor and told him of my favorable impression of your Montana and how he should include one something like yours in his lineup of candidate tractors. If there had been Montana tractors similar to yours available to me when I bought my Kubby I might have gone Montana Green instead of Kubby orange.

Unfortunately common sense is such an uncommon commodity and seems especially difficult to come by in many legal venues.

Of course our woods are our woods and the fish in our ponds are our fish but the deer in our woods and the ducks on our ponds both belong to the state.

Having a patented Oklahoma day. It was over 60F for an overnight low and will be about 20F tonight.

Pat

 

[gemini5362]

pat we are getting the same weather. My wife went to work today and it was 65 degrees and sunny at noon. By 4pm it was 30 and snowing.

your laws are a bit different than ours. In arkansas if you build a pond out of your own pocket ( no state assistance) and you pay for the fish to have it stocked you still have to have a fishing license to fish in your pond because all fish and game belong to the state. I personally have never seen that put to the test and I dont get a fishing license for fishing in my pond. But that is the law as weird as it is. Thank you for the kind words about my Montana. So far I am very pleased with it. I see a couple of dealers near you. Looks like the best one might be in Chicasha. For the money, when I bought it the Montana was the best tractor with equivalent equipment for the purpose I use it for.