Wandering bison buffaloed by deadly hunters
By Associated Press
Saturday, September 13, 2008



FAIRPLAY, Colo. - Keep your bison off my property or risk having them hunted, software executive Jeff Hawn warned his neighbor.

In a lawsuit, he said the bison knocked his satellite TV dishes off line and left dung, tracks and hair on “pristine pasture on rolling hills.†Nine days after the suit was filed, shots rang out. The remains of 32 bison were strewn across Hawn’s property and nearby land. Deputies learned 14 hunters were invited by Hawn to hunt bison on his land.

Now Hawn - the CEO of Seattle-based Attachmate who lives in Austin, Texas - is in criminal court, charged with theft and 32 counts of aggravated animal cruelty following the March shootings. Hawn’s lawyers declined to comment, but one has said Hawn “had no other choice†but to get rid of the bison to protect himself.

It’s hard to find anyone sympathetic to Hawn. The family of the rancher involved, Monte Downare, is well-established, and people in the area are quick to defend him. They bemoan the waste of bison meat and talk about one of the feud’s central issues - fences. Colorado and most other Western states have “open range†laws, meaning livestock can roam wherever they wish. If land owners don’t want animals on their property they are urged to build a fence to keep them out.

I have been following this story ever since I first saw anything about it on the Colorado Division of Wildlife website, back in the spring.

I can see both sides of the story, and I can also see where Colorado D.O.W. and local Law Enforcement let the ball drop on this issue.

The outcome will be interesting.

IMO, I understand the Free Range/Open Range concept, but I also see that the west of 50 or 100 years ago is no longer what it was.

The population of humans in all our western states has increased to the point that the practicallity of of the concept of "Free Range / Open Range" is out dated to say the least.

Many of the new citizens of the west, moved there from housing divisions with 0 lot lines.

Where the concept of letting even a dog run loose is foriegn to those folks.

I think much of what has been accepted tradition in Colorado and some of the other western states, is fixing to come under some hard scrutiny, with people calling for change to such things as "Free Range - Open Range".

Our world is changing and many of those changes will be harfd and extremely upsetting to the way of life many folks were raised within. JMO.

This will end bad for Hawn, free range laws are pretty absolute. It is enough animals that financially it's probably a felony.

I was of the opinion that only Wyoming had a "fenced out" law.....and that only certain parts of Colorado was "open range" meaning..."fenced out"

If the area is indeed "open range" then I would think it's a slam dunk decision.

Further I'm not at all sure that the DOW has any jurisdiction here as the Bison are considered the same as cattle and are not wildlife at all.

There are 13 western states that have some form of open range law in effect.

You could be right as far as the D.O.W. is concerned, but that will probably be cleared up during the trial proceedings.

We were in Fallon, Nevada at top gun years ago and one group coming home from Reno late at night whacked into a whole heard of those Indian Reservation sheep.

It cost them almost $1500 for the sheep. I think it was 6 or 7 sheep. Pretty cheap compared to Greece and Italy. You pay for 10 generations of sheep on that deal.

The guy that was driving the car was called "sheep" for the rest of his tour there.

It's when these guys get lots of money they start thinking that they can do as they please, and they can, until they get caught. I guess he should just pay it off and be done with it, but he will probably fight it to the bitter end. I like the part about "bison dung, tracks and hair on pristine pasture and hills". Seems like his lawyers could've maybe studied American History in High School or something.

Alan

Kind of like shooting your neighbors dog when he shits in your yard. Totally illegal, but could be a little gratifying.

Although there may be 'open range' laws put in place there may also be laws put in place that will overturn 'open range' clauses.

For example: There are open ranges in Oklahoma. Therefore, if a driver was to hit a cow on a state highway, then the owner of the cow is not liable because of the open range laws. HOwever, if said cattle continue to get out of their enclosure (fences, pasture, etc.) on a consistent basis with proper documentation of the events, then the owner of the cattle is liable for damages for not maintaining sufficent stucture(s) to keep his/her livestock within the enclosure.

So, this may be the case that the buffalo are considered livestock and not free ranging animals, and if one can prove that they consistently got out of their enclosure, then the owner of the buffalo may be liable for damages incured? Who knows? My guess is that the buffalo will be considered livestock since Mr. Downare 'owns' the buffalo. Guess we'll just have to wait and see what the courts decide.

Considering that Colorado doesn't have bison as a game animal, and Downare does own the bison. Not much else can be said for that rich guy.

Don't ya just love it when they move to a place and want it to be like where they came from.

You know TJAY it is so true.

A lot of people that have money end up buying up these big western ranches and converting them into "ecological areas".

In Wyoming a lot of them are from Minnesota, Michegan, Colorado, Texas, California, and Arizona.

Here in Texas, we have people moving from the suburbs into the more rural areas, and start putting in St. Augustine grass lawns, and get themselves a couple of horses for a five acre Estate.

Then complain when the deer and the feral hogs move in and eat a couple of thouisand dollars worth of landscaping in a single night.

Or wonder why their Shit-Zu or House kitty disappears one afternoon while out running free on their Estate.

The majority of people who have spent most of their lives in an Urban or Suburban setting, really have No Business moving into Rural Areas, simply because they have no knowkledge, except maybe what they have learned from Disney, about how things work in the real world, especially when dealing with nature. JMO.

This story goes quite a bit deeper than the article posted by kathi. It happened about 6 months ago and there has been a lot of coverage in the Colorado papers.

I saw an article about a month ago that brought some new light on this. In that article (I don't have a link, but it was in the Rocky Mounatin News), information came to light that not all the bison were actually killed on Hawn/s property. They also found dead bison on neighboring property, land owned by the State of Colorado and also on land owned by the Federal Government. In other words, Hawn called a bunch of his buddies and told them to go kill any bison they saw.

There were over 30 of them killed and almost none of the meat was recoverd. The simple waste and lack of respect that Hawn showed to his neighbors is unjustified. Hawn is a recent transplant from Texas that bought property and like many new transplants, thinks he has more pull than he actually does. The Downare's have been in that area for generations and according to the news reports, had been trying to take care of the problem and Hawn began shooting before Downare could arrange the help and trucks to get the bison back. Anybody want to guess where the local sympothy lies on this?

Add all this on top of the open range laws and Hawn is in some serious trouble. The Colorado DOW has very little to do with this because bison are classified as livestock in the State of Colorado, however, livestock theft and wanton destruction falls under the jurisdiction of the Park County Sheriff's Dept and the Colorado State Police. I'm glad I wasn't in on that shooting.

Mac

The laws defiantly side with the rancher, but I’ve seen this ranch and there is no wonder the bison were not staying in the pastures. There was noting for them to eat in their pastures last time I was there and the ranchers fences are not adequate to stop hungry bison from getting out. Yes Colorado is an open range State so a better option for Mr. Hawn would have been to round up the bison on his property and hauled them to a sale barn; selling them in the owner’s name so that the owner would have at least got the money for the bison. I don’t know the legality of that but it has been done before and my father who worked many years at Winters Livestock and has ranched his whole life has talked about it happening more than once.

Really all this boils down to is two neighbors who couldn’t get along. There is that old saying that good fences make good neighbors and there is a lot of truth to that. Even though we are open range there is still the simple fact that animal ownership comes with responsibilities, not only to the animals but your neighbors around you. Responsible ownership means keeping your animals where they belong regardless of open range laws or not. Even though my dad could let his cattle run loose he chooses to spend the money every year to feed his cattle as well as build fences to keep them in and stay in good with his neighbors.

What really upsets me about this whole thing is the fact that all the news agencies are stating that these bison were hunted. The fact is that they were shot and that there was no hunting involved. The news media needs to learn just because an animal was killed with a bullet or an arrow it doesn’t mean that that animal was hunted.

Maybe some of you have heard of the "lady" who moved to a Colorado ski area outside the normal town limits. Seemed she built her home right on an elk migration route. After the elk had done extreme damage to her landscaping, she called the DOW and demanded they keep the wildlife "penned up" so as not to damage her property.

It's always the rich guys fault isn't it? Sounds like a bunch of jealous azzholes. Keep your mangy azz animals on your property and there won't be any problems.

There are 2 sides to every story, but what I want to know if this:

If the guy is going to be held accountable for having the bison shot, then who is going to be accountable for all the damage his property received from these roaming animals?

In years past, I used to raise both goats and sheep, and on several occasions, dogs would come on to our property and kill them.

I don't care who the dog(s) belonged to, but in those circumstances, they are shot on sight -- and Texas law protects the landowner is these instances.

In one instance, the dogs would come during the night, so I set traps. Yes, I caught them -- and yes, I shot them. From the tags, I got the info I needed from the local vet, and then I handed over the dog tags to the local Sheriff's Department. Asked if I wanted to seek damages, I said no. But I asked the deputy to send word to the owner of the dogs: "Any dogs seen harassing livestock or wildlife will be shot on sight, and from this day forward, you'll be held responsible for any financial losses incurred."

Miraculously, the marauding stopped...

quote:

Originally posted by M16:
It's always the rich guys fault isn't it? Sounds like a bunch of jealous azzholes. Keep your mangy azz animals on your property and there won't be any problems.

Again Colorado is an "Open Range" State. The animal owner doesn't have to fence his animals in. If a person doesn't want them on their property they are responsible to keep them fenced off. The livestock owner isn't responsible for any damages caused by his/her livestock.

I agree that these two parties should have worked something out between them before it went this far. Like I said it probably was two people who couldn't compromise and be neighborly. The landowner has the law on his side in this case.

I agree that the responsible thing to do would have been for the bison's owner to keep his animals in. People who move to Colorado need to realize as well that we don't always have the same laws as where you just came from. Yes these laws can be changed but shooting your neigbors property rarely changes anything except where you get to live.

No, I'm sorry but you don't go round shooting other people's livestock. Even if you're rich and especially if you're from Texas. If you're from Texas, then you're probably not IN Texas so don't behave like you're in Texas. Ya'll can keep Mr. Hawn, we got enough like him. He shoulda let the law handle it. He's sure seems to have enough lawyers to do that. Besides, you gotta wonder if he actually thought he was going to be able to do this and not raise a stink? That's the stupidest part of all.

I'll go along with the "good fences make good neighbors" thing. My fences are good and I get along with my neighbors just fine. I don't bother them and they don't bother me. Works. I'll also go along with the "they just weren't trying to get along" thing too. hey didn't have good fences. I have built fences to keep my cows in and I have built fences to keep other people's cows out, but I haven't shot anyone's cows because they were on my place.

If the bison destroyed something, then the owner should be held liable (if that's the law in Colorado) Mr. Hawn destroyed someone's property. He should be held liable (if that's the law in Colorado). I don't know about “Open Range†laws, don't really care to know, unless I go to Colorado which is not likely.

It doesn't have a damn thing to do with being rich or poor. It has to do with respecting other people's property. Both sides here are at fault. The bison farmer can pay for the satellite dish and charge Hawn for fertilizer and Hawn can pay for 30 Bison hunts, self guided. Get over it.

Alan

quote:

Originally posted by Alan R. McDaniel, Jr.:
Both sides here are at fault.
Alan

Here is the real TRUTH! AMEN ALAN!!

Going by the law Mr. Hawn appears to be in the wrong. Open range may have outlived it's usefulness. I don't think that buffalo were livestock back when the laws were put in place.

Now let's consider the moral and ethical part. Something that's often forgotten. Is it right to let your animals destroy someone else's property even though it is legal?

The majority of my neighbors are decent people and do their best to control their livestock. But as usual I have a couple of them who just have to try to take advantage every chance they get. If they see a blade of grass on their property that means it's time to add more cattle. When their grass is totally gone guess where they head. One time is no big deal. Twice and something better get done. The third time let's just say that drastic measures are taken to get the point across.

Hawn sounds like a spoiled little brat who can't play well with others. What he did is not only illegal, it reprehensible. Hawn appears to be an ignorant, arrogant and inconsiderate individual. This will not bode well for him a court of law.

He has some unbelievable sense of entitlement that makes him think he is better than everyone else around him. "My blades of grass on the hillside are more important than this ranchers Bison."

I will be happy to see him found guilty.

quote:

Originally posted by M16:
Going by the law Mr. Hawn appears to be in the wrong. Open range may have outlived it's usefulness. I don't think that buffalo were livestock back when the laws were put in place.

M16, open range is has not outlived its usefulness. While certain aspects of the law could be changed, if “Open Range†was taken away you might see a drastic decrease in beef cattle production in the United States. Open range keeps the ranchers and farmers from having to pay large amounts of money to insurance companies for liability insurance. Ranching isn’t a extremely profitable endeavor for the people who make their living at it and to add the expense and cut into their livelihood. As it is now if a ranchers animal regardless of species is involved in an accident with a vehicle, it is the same as your vehicle colliding with a deer. Neither party is at fault, but if we go to a closed range State this would all change.

Livestock owners should be responsible for making every attempt to keep their livestock on their property. Even though in Open Range States like CO the landowner doesn’t have to keep fences they should feel an obligation to keep their animals where they belong. I have no doubt that even though the law sides with Mr. Downare, he is as much to blame about this as Mr. Hawn.

quote:

Originally posted by Wendell Reich:
Hawn sounds like a spoiled little brat who can't play well with others. What he did is not only illegal, it reprehensible. Hawn appears to be an ignorant, arrogant and inconsiderate individual.

Mr. Hawn sounds too me like a very frustrated man who couldn’t reach an agreement with his neighbor. I’ll bet it was two very large egos clashing here more than anything else. Mr. Hawn is going to pay very dearly for his lapse in judgment, but I’d like to be the Judge presiding over this case because I’d have a few choice words for Mr. Downare.

This guy is fixing to get an extremely expensive education, as he should.

Open range laws like we have here in Az means that you are responsible for fencing the livestock out, and until you do they have the right to graze your property.
I would imagine that it is the same in Colorado.

Taylorce1,

I think you've made a fair statement as to what happened. The way closed range works, at least where I am, is if your livestock gets on the road and gets hit by a vehicle you are not responsible unless it can be proven that it has happened on a consistent basis. You would not be paid for your deceased animal though.

I think that anyone who has been around buffalo would probably agree that a five strand bobwire
fence will not contain them if they decide to go elsewhere. Is it fair that if my neighbor decides to raise buffalo that I would need to build a pipe fence? I don't think they had buffalo in mind when open range was established.

quote:

I don't think they had buffalo in mind when open range was established.

By danged you hit it on the head,, that is the defense that this guy is going to use..
And he just might make it work, because ope nrange laws were put in place for "cattlemen" and buffalo are not cattle for sure.

But then the dept of wildlife might have an angle on him but the open range laws most likely will not apply to cover buffalo.

quote:

Originally posted by bucko:

quote:

I don't think they had buffalo in mind when open range was established.

By danged you hit it on the head,, that is the defense that this guy is going to use..
And he just might make it work, because ope nrange laws were put in place for "cattlemen" and buffalo are not cattle for sure.

But then the dept of wildlife might have an angle on him but the open range laws most likely will not apply to cover buffalo.

These bison were not wild animals, they were/are domestic livestock. Open Range Laws apply to all livestock be it horses, sheep, goats, cattle, or bison. The DOW has no stake in this as they do not regulate privately owned livestock. Bison still belong to the "Bovine" family which makes them cattle more or less.

quote:

Originally posted by M16:
Taylorce1,

I think you've made a fair statement as to what happened. The way closed range works, at least where I am, is if your livestock gets on the road and gets hit by a vehicle you are not responsible unless it can be proven that it has happened on a consistent basis. You would not be paid for your deceased animal though.

This is the way it works in Oklahoma too. If it can be proven the livestock in question routinely escaped their enclosure, then the owner of the livestock is responsible for any damages they might have caused. I wouldn't be surprised if there is a similar clause in CO law regarding open range.

quote:

Originally posted by graybird:

quote:

Originally posted by M16:
Taylorce1,

I think you've made a fair statement as to what happened. The way closed range works, at least where I am, is if your livestock gets on the road and gets hit by a vehicle you are not responsible unless it can be proven that it has happened on a consistent basis. You would not be paid for your deceased animal though.

This is the way it works in Oklahoma too. If it can be proven the livestock in question routinely escaped their enclosure, then the owner of the livestock is responsible for any damages they might have caused. I wouldn't be surprised if there is a similar clause in CO law regarding open range.

No such law exists in Colorado. In fact in certian areas on rural roads you will cross cattle guards and have no fence to keep cattle off of the roads for miles. I have family who run their cattle in this manner. In fact in the State of Colorado is responsible to keep the cattle off any State roads and Interstate Highways and maintains all the fences along it. Colorado is a 100% fence out State.

Ok, I know I'm just stirring the pot. "What buffalo? You mean the ones I bought a couple years back and decided to shoot last weekend? What receipts? Does the other guy have one?"

Just a really bad thought.

quote:

Originally posted by larrys:
Ok, I know I'm just stirring the pot. "What buffalo? You mean the ones I bought a couple years back and decided to shoot last weekend? What receipts? Does the other guy have one?"

Just a really bad thought.

Colorado has a brand law as well, any livestock sold in the State of Colorado will have Brand Inspection paperwork given to him by the State Brand Inspector. Regardless if the animal is branded or not if he uses that defense he will have to produce a bill of sale and brand inspection paperwork as well as health inspection paperwork if they were brought in out of State. If Mr. Downare branded his bison then that Mr. Hawn will not be able to even contemplate that defense.

quote:

quote:
Originally posted by bucko:

quote:
I don't think they had buffalo in mind when open range was established.


By danged you hit it on the head,, that is the defense that this guy is going to use..
And he just might make it work, because ope nrange laws were put in place for "cattlemen" and buffalo are not cattle for sure.

But then the dept of wildlife might have an angle on him but the open range laws most likely will not apply to cover buffalo.


These bison were not wild animals, they were/are domestic livestock. Open Range Laws apply to all livestock be it horses, sheep, goats, cattle, or bison. The DOW has no stake in this as they do not regulate privately owned livestock. Bison still belong to the "Bovine" family which makes them cattle more or less.

I kinda doubt that Bison would be considered as domestic livestock.

I guess if I were to move to Colorado and raise Rhinos the "fence 'em out" law would apply??????

You must be held responsible for your actions.

The rancher is responsible for keeping his Bison in, if he has ranched Bison for very long, he knows they can be destructive. They are big pushy animals. Letting them roam free was inconsiderate, whether it was legal or not.

Mr. Hawn will also be held responsible for his actions. There was no need to react in such an extreme manner.

Two wrongs do not make a right.

Wendell Reich wrote:

quote:

Two wrongs do not make a right

quote:

Originally posted by JTEX:
I kinda doubt that Bison would be considered as domestic livestock.

I guess if I were to move to Colorado and raise Rhinos the "fence 'em out" law would apply??????

These bison are traded through local sale barns, you can find them at about any one throughout the State. While they are not traded in great numbers, they are treated just like domestic cattle by the State. Like is was stated earlier in this thread there are no "Wild" bison in Colorado just ranch owned animals weather it be for hunting purposes or meat production.

If you were to get it approved to bring Rhinos into the State, yes the same laws would apply. Bringing an exotic species like rhino into Colorado would be the toughest challenge of all. My dad had a neighbor who tried to raise elk, now he had to fence his elk in because of DOW regulations about domestic game species. Colorado is a Brucellosis free State and he had to have his elk tested on more than one occasion he had to destroy most of his herd because they tested positive for it.

Listen I'm no expert on all the "Range" laws in Colorado, but I do have over 30 years of ranching experience.

In Arizona the open range laws state that you must fence out range cattle from your property with at least a 4 strand barbed wire fence if you don't want them eating your rosebushes or shitting on your porch.
However buffalo are not impressed by a fence that would stop a cow, they go through or over with ease.
So there is going to be a big dustup over the type of fencing required in this case I would bet.
This is the type of case that gets laws changed, and bison growers are danged likely to see new laws over this event.
I know the arrogant dickhead was wrong for how he handled it, but this has a smell to it that it might not go the way expected.
I can see and understand open range and agree, but where does it draw the line? a ten foot electrified fence to keep your buffalo off??

Open range was designed for cattlemen, not buffalomen and if this thing is pressed all the way the buffalomen are damn sure going to lose.

And what about the fact that this fellow actually did none of the killing himself?
I bet he researched things a little better than suspected before hand to insulate himself.
He {invited} not paid them to kill the buffalo.

I get the real feeling that this fello isa first class slime sucking asshole, but he is not stupid by any stretch , and I wager taht before this is over you see major changes in the open range raising of buffalo in Colorado.

quote:

Originally posted by bucko:
In Arizona the open range laws state that you must fence out range cattle from your property with at least a 4 strand barbed wire fence if you don't want them eating your rosebushes or shitting on your porch.
However buffalo are not impressed by a fence that would stop a cow, they go through or over with ease.

Open range was designed for cattlemen, not buffalomen and if this thing is pressed all the way the buffalomen are damn sure going to lose.

Cattle are not impressed by a 4 wire fence if they want out/in either as these bison did. Colorado has been going through a drought over the last couple of years and I imagine Mr. Downare found it easier/cheaper to let his bison free graze than to buy feed. I've been by Mr. Downare place and there is absolutely nothing for his bison to graze on last time I was there. A bison will stay behind a regular cattle fence if there is something to eat and he has no other reason to get out. They are simple creatures like any other animal they will stay next to a good food and water source until they are pressured to do otherwise. What Mr. Downare should have done was buy feed or sell down his herd to something more manageable until the drought was over.

Again I'm not saying Mr. Hawn didn't do something illegal and wrong, just that he isn't the only party to blame for this happening. Mr. Downare is as much to blame in this as anyone for not stopping this before it went as far as it did.

Again as far as Colorado law is concerned bison and cattle the same; there is no difference between them. If the Open Range Laws get changed because of this then even the cattlemen will suffer. Believe me this isn't the only time people complain about trespassing cattle, it happens all the time when people come to Colorado and buy land next to State and Federal lands leased to ranchers for grazing. These new landowners are very upset when they find out the law is on the side of the cattleman, so I imagine eventually as fewer and fewer ranches survive the economy, the laws will get changed.

There is a tremendous difference between the respect that cattle pay a tight well made four strand barbed wire fence, and buffalo's regard for same.
For one thing , but which you most likely already know is that a bufalo can hop over a four strand fence like a deer, heck most likely easier.