Texan guilty in bison slaughter
Former neighbor agrees to plea deal in livestock dispute
By Jean Torkelson, Rocky Mountain News (Contact)
Published November 3, 2008 at 10:32 a.m.
Updated November 4, 2008 at 12:20 a.m.
Three generations of a Park County ranching family watched Monday as their former next-door neighbor took responsibility for killing 32 of their bison that had strayed onto his property last March.
In a region where ranching is sacrosanct, and given the "great community outcry" over the livestock's loss, a plea agreement was made only reluctantly, prosecutor Katherine O'Brien said.
However, "my sense is this is the right thing to do," O'Brien told Judge Stephen Groome.
Jeffrey Scott Hawn pleaded guilty to one felony count of criminal mischief and guilty to one count of cruelty to animals, a misdemeanor.
Under the agreement, when sentenced Jan. 28, he faces a two-year deferred judgment on the felony count and up to 10 days in the Park County jail on the misdemeanor charge. The plea agreement also calls for 96 hours of public service.
Hawn, a software executive who lives in Austin, Texas, also agreed to pay the Downare family nearly $84,000 for the loss of their bison, $4,000 to Park County in investigatory costs and a total of $70,000 to seven Colorado animal protection organizations.
Groome made it clear he would treat Hawn severely if he violated any terms of the agreement.
"If there's any violation of the law during that time, do you understand I can sentence you to an awful lot of years in the Department of Corrections?" Groome asked Hawn. "Just because of your economic status you're not going to be given any slack - two years to toe the line is two years to toe the line."
"I do understand that, sir, and that's a risk I'm willing to take," Hawn replied.
Hawn, 45, was accompanied by his lawyer, Pamela Mackey. He declined to speak to reporters.
In his business suit and tie, Hawn contrasted with the working ranch gear of the Downare family. At least six members of the clan, headed by Monte Downare, 51, sat through the hourlong hearing in silence, except for the constant gurgling of his grandson, Jarrett, 8 months.
Afterward, Downare said of the agreement, "It's all right. It's getting it over with."
The crime, which the judge called "one of the most controversial cases this county has seen in a long time" was set in motion last December, according to the account, which the prosecutor laid out in court.
Hard, high snowdrifts and a broken fence allowed bison owned by the Downares to stray onto Hawn's property during a three-month period. He had bought the property in the fall of 2007 to build his dream vacation home, O'Brien said.
When he was unable to keep the animals off his land, the frustrated Texan arranged to have some local men "take care" of the bison. When corralling them didn't work, Hawn ordered the men to get rid of them any way they could. The men, who were not charged, let it be known in the area that they might soon have fresh bison meat to give to a church run by a local Indian tribe.
On the day of the killings, March 19, members of the Downare family actually ran into the group of "gleeful hunters," who asked them if they were part of the bison-hunting party, O'Brien said. Hawn was among the men who shot the bison, O'Brien said.
At that moment, faced with the killers of their own livestock, the prosecutor added, "I have to commend the Downares for their calmness under pressure."
Mackey said she didn't dispute the basic facts, but would be prepared to put a different interpretation on them at Hawn's January sentencing.
"It's obviously not the whole story," Mackey said.
Featured
-
DNC in Denver
Complete coverage of the 2008 Democratic National Convention.
-
The Crevasse
A five-part series that examines one tragic day on Mount Rainier.
-
Deadly denial
Sick nuclear workers applied for government compensation but most haven't seen a dime.
-
Final Salute
The Rocky followed Maj. Steve Beck as he took on the most difficult duty of his career.
-
'Colorado's burning'
Coverage of the state's worst wildfires.
-
Columbine shootings
Coverage of the April 20, 1999, shootings at Littleton's Columbine High School.
-
The Crossing
Colorado's deadliest traffic accident killed 20 children on Dec. 14, 1961.
-
Osveli's journey
Osveli Sales left Guatemala for a better life. Two months later, he came home in a box.
-
Wake for an Indian warrior
Oglala Sioux bestow a tribute to the first tribal fatality in Iraq.
November 3, 2008
10:43 a.m.
Suggest removal
JluvDC writes:
He got off easy. But at least it looks like the family was properly compensated.
November 3, 2008
10:54 a.m.
Suggest removal
BRM writes:
This was a clearcut murder for hire case. He should've done jail time, but of course as this millionaire will write a paltry check (for him) and be off scott-free. What a sham!!
November 3, 2008
11 a.m.
Suggest removal
buffsblg writes:
Any plea deal is a compromise, but this guy takes a felony conviction and it seems the victims (who may not be totally blameless but did not deserve anything like this) did agree. I would enjoy this guy getting a couple of days in jail just to ensure he will take the law more seriously next time. The money should be some hit as well, but this guy seems to buy his way through life.
I wonder if the other shooters will be charged with anything? Even if they believed they had been given "permission" it seems they at least trespassed and chased these animals all over the county.
November 3, 2008
11 a.m.
Suggest removal
Devil_Dog writes:
Wake up people men like this scumbag CEO are exactly whats wrong with this country. They think that they can do anything they like and we let them. Real prison time is what this idiot needs and a real fine 160k is nothing to this POS. We need to start making examples of a few of these guys!
November 3, 2008
11:08 a.m.
Suggest removal
pete10000ft writes:
I live outside of Fairplay..this CEO should be treated to some old west justice: Drag him down main st tied to a Bison then ride him out of town on a rail. THEN fine him 200K.
They all come up here and build their trophy homes with no regard to the culture or the history. they think it is just like their gated community in suburbia. they claim they moved up here for the simple life and then b!tch about the lack of strip malls and starbucks. they really ought to just go to a dude ranch once a year and buy a cowboy hat and be done with it......
November 3, 2008
11:09 a.m.
Suggest removal
Classof80 writes:
Once again money talks and B.S. walks!!!!! This a** needs to be behind bars and maybe then he will realize that his money can't get him everywhere.
November 3, 2008
11:10 a.m.
Suggest removal
Willy writes:
Dog - Contrary to popular belief, most CEOs are hard working, honest individuals trying to do what is best for their employees, stockholders and customers.
However, I am very familiar with this case and it would be very appropriate to contact Attachmate and let them know your feelings about this moron.
November 3, 2008
11:13 a.m.
Suggest removal
Classof80 writes:
Pete you are so correct I'm a native of Park County and get so sick and tired of poeple moving up there and then wanting it to be like the big city. They cut up the country let their dogs run loose and this B!tch at you when you try to tell them that their breaking the law !! If all those suburbia putz's moved the h*ll out of there the county would be a better place to live!!!
November 3, 2008
11:13 a.m.
Suggest removal
mytwosense writes:
Anyone who didn't have $100K to buy their way out of this crime would be in jail right now, period.
It is an understatement to call what just happened here an outrage. It is part of a larger sickness in this country where a petty thief can get a life sentence, while a Wall Street crook gets a golden parachute.
We need to ask ourselves as a country what we are turning into.
Also, if you own a business or run a department that uses NetIQ/Attachmate products, boycott 'em and tell 'em why. IT folks will know what I'm talking about.
November 3, 2008
11:13 a.m.
Suggest removal
pete10000ft writes:
http://www.attachmate.com/Worldwide/U...
November 3, 2008
11:14 a.m.
Suggest removal
gs writes:
Perhaps Mr Hawn won't come back to Colorado if we are lucky. good luck to the Downares.
November 3, 2008
11:16 a.m.
Suggest removal
pete10000ft writes:
attachmate has offices all over the world. the sun does not set on this Corp. this is probably one of 10+ houses this clown has..
November 3, 2008
11:30 a.m.
Suggest removal
RainbowWarrior writes:
Sure says alot about a country when rich guys walk and can buy their way out of trouble and some guy in Texas who gets caught selling a tiny amount of pot spends the rest of his life in jail! There really does seem to be two Americas, how sad. So why is there manditory sentencing for some crimes and pleas allowed for others? What happened to equal justice? Can anyone provide a link to a picture of this guy so we can all tell him how Coloradoans feel about guys like him when we see him around?
November 3, 2008
11:33 a.m.
Suggest removal
COLibertarian writes:
This guy needs to be busted up good. Prison time and his assets removed. Have no use for him at all.
AND.........
Oh yea lets boycott the company that hired him. Lets not only punish him but all of the people that work at this company. Lets bankrupt this company. That way we can have more out of work people (who probably did not care for the guy anyways)that cant pay their mortgages. That will really show Him!!!
November 3, 2008
11:43 a.m.
Suggest removal
mytwosense writes:
Well, COLib, when NetIQ merged with Attachmate, he probably "downsized" a lot of workers, anyway. And since our judicial system won't punish him, this is a way for the people of Colorado to do so.
November 3, 2008
11:56 a.m.
Suggest removal
COLibertarian writes:
MTS
To punish a man for the crimes HE committed, we then must punish the Employees that work for him?
Your assumption that this guy layed people off in the merger is most likely correct. With that said, he did not "care' about the employees anyways as he layed some off, using this logic..
So if he does not care about the employees, how is it punishing him by crippling the company and laying off more employees in the process of punishing him? How many employees do we axe in the name of punishing this man? What did these employees do to warrant the wrath of something they had no say in?
November 3, 2008
noon
Suggest removal
gs writes:
He is now a felon. Doesn't Sorbanne Oxley say no felon CEOs? So maybe he just retired too?
November 3, 2008
12:11 p.m.
Suggest removal
mytwosense writes:
CoLib, using what logic?? It is not logical to assume that just because he wouldn't care if his employees were affected by a boycott means he wouldn't be affected financially if his company was crippled.
Unfortunately, in this day and age it seems boycotts are increasingly our only recourse...as too often justice is not meted out to those who can buy their way out of criminal and/or unethical behavior.
November 3, 2008
12:19 p.m.
Suggest removal
Acemon writes:
No sympathy for a man whose fence was repeatly breeched and his land trampled and damaged? No recognition of his attempts to talk with the animals owners to prevent it from happening again and again? No beliefs in property rights? No comments regarding people who owned huge animals and were unable to keep them restrained in a responsible manner?
classof80 even wrote "They cut up the country let their dogs run loose..." when referring to newcomers. Isn't letting your lifestock run loose the same thing, or do you have double standards in regard to existing residents?
November 3, 2008
12:33 p.m.
Suggest removal
Classof80 writes:
This state has always had freerange for livestock. And no there's no sympathy for person who comes to this state and thinks he's above the law.
November 3, 2008
12:49 p.m.
Suggest removal
Cowboy63 writes:
Simmer down, Brothers. The sentence is just. They wouldn't have struck a plea deal if the Downare family hadn't agreed to it. Hawn was in the wrong from the beginning. I share your outrage at the out of state millionaires who think Colorado is their personal, part time playground. Remember. Some Coloradan sold his land to this loser in the first place. This is all these millionaires understand - hit 'em in the wallet. Did this idiot really think he was going to put up a fence and keep the Bison out?!
One thing. Let him start his 10-day sentence NOW and let him out ONLY after every penny of the fine has been paid. I wouldn't trust this vindictive punk to pay up after he's done his time.
I agree with another poster here. What about the "hunters" he hired? They deserve strict punishment as well.
November 3, 2008
12:53 p.m.
Suggest removal
cassidy22 writes:
Acemon, I own livestock. And of course, I maintain my fencing in order to protect my own livestock. But Colorado law actually states that if you want someone else's livestock to stay OFF your property, it's YOUR responsibility to keep them out. I didn't believe it when I read it, but it's the truth.
If he didn't want Bison on his land, he should have built better fencing (or bought different property) The fencing requirements to keep bison in (or out) are pretty tough - those animals can bust through a lot of serious fencing that would keep the average horse/cattle ranch contained.
He was in the wrong and should have maintained his own fencing. He certainly had no right to KILL them all. A good neighbor would call, and help round 'em up and get them home. I'd be out of my mind if someone HIRED gunmen to kill all my sheep if they had managed to get out of my pasture. It's one thing to get replacement value - but that doesn't cover feed cost for the life of the animals you lost, or the genetics you were maintaining in your herd. That's pretty rough to start over with a new set of genes, and animals who don't know your land.
November 3, 2008
12:57 p.m.
Suggest removal
COLibertarian writes:
mytwosense writes:
"Well, COLib, when NetIQ merged with Attachmate, he probably "downsized" a lot of workers, anyway"
Well you state that he doesnt care about employees anyway. If he doesnt care, then we should not be concerned that others lose their jobs because of boycotting a company based upon 1 man's actions?????
I despise this guy beyond comprehension, but I do not feel comfortable punishing employees that work at the same company as this scumbag.
I am not standing up for this guy in anyway form or fashion. I am trying to stand up for the employees of this company that had NOTHING to do with this crime.
You and I have the freedoms to make these choices. I choose not to in this case.
We need to support the normal Joes and Sues of this world To throw them under the bus for our vengance, is nothing I want to sign up for.
November 3, 2008
1:03 p.m.
Suggest removal
mytwosense writes:
I understand CoLib. Unfortunately, we're such a consumer-based society, there's often no way to use our consumer power, if you can call it that anymore, without throwing an innocent person under the bus.
For example, I like to shop at local, independent shops because I am opposed to the business practices of many international companies. That incidentally might punish a worker with one of those companies who has no real say in their business practices. I can't help that.
November 3, 2008
1:11 p.m.
Suggest removal
Vampyre writes:
For those of you that are so vehemently against Texans, what do you suggest doing? Building a wall along the borders of Colorado and preventing Texans from coming to Colorado? But, wait wouldn't that then be like everyone in Colorado living in a prison themselves?
I see and hear ALOT of animosity thrown towards Texans, and believe it or not. Colorado isn't any different than anywhere else. You don't hear folks down in Texas saying nasty things about folks from Colorado that go down there to visit, or the ones that end up in court for transporting drugs from Colorado to Texas.
Texas has done the state of Colorado a favor more times than not by housing state prisoners in private prisons because there weren't enough available beds in the prisons here in Colorado.
Don't knock Texas, just because there have been a few bad seeds coming out of there doesn't make Texas all bad. Texas has alot more friendlier, and nicer people than colorado can ever think of having.
For those of you that are whining, and B!tching about how the rich folks have turned your town into a playground. You can either sit on here and cry about it, or you can do something about it. BUT the more you whine about it, the less anything will ever be done, or any measures will be put into place to make the changes.
November 3, 2008
1:18 p.m.
Suggest removal
COLibertarian writes:
MTS,
I do understand your point there completely MTS. You are choosing to shop at 1 store while not supporting another store. We all do that and I support that principle. I really do.
If for example, if Attachmate had a policy of killing buffalo or other livestock, You would get run over by me being the first to boycott this company :-) I would also promote the boycotting of other questionable actions taken by any CEO acting on hehalf of that company. In this instance, I do not believe the CEO acting on behalf of the company, but for himself.
I DO NOT SUPORT WHAT I AM ABOUT TO SAY!!!!!!!!!
This scumbag was let off by the County. He plead to a lesser punishment that was approved by the County. Should we not boycott the lawyer(s) that got him this deal? Should we not boycott the county that approved this deal?
Again I am not in support of boycotting the good people of Park County. I am betting that the county officials who approved this deal will have to sweat it out a bit in the next election by the same good people of Park County.
November 3, 2008
1:28 p.m.
Suggest removal
windskull writes:
If you want to get to the root you need to recall the jerk that catered to these yahoos in the first place another Texas migrant locust Bill Owens who only came here for what he could take and take he did leaving behind a legacy $19.5 BILLION Dollar deficit...but also there are serious questions unanswered regarding the so called "hunters" hired to shoot these animals then leave the carcasses to rot, everywhere in the USA you must pass the equivalent of a hunters safety course and whether you are on private hunting lodge property or US Forest Land a permit or hunting license for the species is required and even trophy hunters know it`s a cardinal sin to waste game
November 3, 2008
1:41 p.m.
Suggest removal
windskull writes:
freethought I`d just like to add that vampyre must be excited ,confused or both regarding a drug pipeline FROM Colorado TO Texas...unless of course those along the Southern Border are lying about mass drug murders
November 3, 2008
1:49 p.m.
Suggest removal
fiesty writes:
Wow, I guess I can go ruin my neighbor's yard and property scot-free if I have "range" animals! Love how one party in this case is held responsible for their actions, but the other isn't.
November 3, 2008
1:50 p.m.
Suggest removal
windskull writes:
Oh and if you want to know how warm and accommodating those fine folks are just ask Cindy Sheehan
November 3, 2008
1:56 p.m.
Suggest removal
fiesty writes:
btw, it's evident based on the postings on this board, that very few (except Acemon) are familiar with this case. Yes, Hawn should not have done what he did. However, his frustration is understandable. The Downares repeatedly failed to control their animals, and they destroyed parts of Hawn's property- even destroyed the fence he put up to protect it. Further, Hawn couldn't even live on his own property due to the safety concerns of the roaming bison. (Can you imagine 32 bison running around on yours?? Nice playmates for the kiddies. And, instead of playing with mud, how about playing with the doodo from 32 bison. Real sanitary!) Hawn repeatedly contacted the Downares to try and resolve the issue, and they refused to do anything. He contacted the sheriff- also refused to do anything. Finally, he went to court. Granted, he should have waited, but I can understand his frustration. While the sentence is just for his actions, the Downares also need to be held accountable.
November 3, 2008
2 p.m.
Suggest removal
JluvDC writes:
Not sure why we are supposed to have sympathy for this man. If he had an issue with the property being damaged he should have waited for his lawsuit to be settled or invested in better fences. Nothing justifies hiring people to shoot someone's livestock, especially with a large number being pregnant.
November 3, 2008
2:05 p.m.
Suggest removal
fiesty writes:
cassidy22 - it sounds like you are a responsible livestock owner. However, from all accounts, the Downares are not. You mention neighbors lending a helping hand to rein the livestock back in; however, Hawn reportedly contacted the Downares on several occasions when their bison ended up on his land, and they REFUSED to come get their animals! Not a neighborly thing to do at all. And did they volunteer to help him with his fence? Of course not, not even after their bison destroyed it.
You know, it's real easy to rail against the mean millionare. However, I just can't believe the reported behavior of the livestock owners. It goes beyond just irresponsibility. And yet they are getting rewarded. Unbelievable.
November 3, 2008
2:05 p.m.
Suggest removal
COLibertarian writes:
fiesty read Cassidy's Post above regarding fencing. She is absolutely correct in her statements. Colorado is not the only state in which this is correct.
Fences are to keep things out, not to keep things in.................
That being said, I am not sure how that implies to certain scenarios such as buffalo. I am assuming they are categorized as livestock. This may change if my assuming category is incorrect.
November 3, 2008
2:22 p.m.
gs writes:
(This comment was removed by the site staff.)
November 3, 2008
2:28 p.m.
Suggest removal
fiesty writes:
COLibertarian - Hawn did put up fencing, which the bison (by sheer numbers) broke down.
Once again, I am by no means excusing him; what I am doing, is pointing out that the Downares should be held accountable too. Most ranchers I know would immediately go get any of their strays when called. They would also apologize, and help with any damage their livestock caused. Guess the Downares don't believe in taking responsibility for (or of) their livestock.
freethought- please, let's try to stay mature. I didn't say I had a problem with CO laws, but with blatantly irresponsible, uncaring livestock owners. Apparently you forget that there are also laws regarding maintaining and caring for your lifestock.
November 3, 2008
2:30 p.m.
Suggest removal
COLibertarian writes:
freethought,
feisty may disagree on the subject of this thread, but telling her she needs to leave because she disagrees is way out of bounds. I may disagree but will defend her right to express her views. She has done so in a civil manner. I respect that.
This is a complex issue and do not think we have heard the complete facts on either side of the coin here.
freethought and wind,
I am not a fan of most tourists that visit this state or where I was originally raised. That being said, I do understand what those tourist dollars do for the counties that were mentioned. Without those dollars, those counties and the citizens of those counties would bleed to death. Is this an acceptable outcome for not having tourism, and therefore no Texans?
November 3, 2008
2:36 p.m.
Suggest removal
pete10000ft writes:
Fiesty check the laws: it is Hawns responsiblity to keep livestock OFF his land. Downares were following the law Hawn was not. Then Hawn took the law into his own hands and he deserves much more than he got in terms of punishment. BY LAW Hawn is the criminal not the Downares. Your point is moot:let it go.
November 3, 2008
2:40 p.m.
Suggest removal
COLibertarian writes:
feisty,
Unless we have complete records of what was said in all discussions between both parties, I dont think we will ever have a complete picture. In the end, the buffalo should never have been shot. There have been battles with bison fencing and neighbors in different states and counties. I understand the frustration and feel that it was felt by both parties.
I have looked around and have not seen any details on the type of fence that was destroyed. Was it a 4 or 5 wire fence? Was it woven wire sheep fence? Or was it made for buffalo? Big difference.
November 3, 2008
2:43 p.m.
Suggest removal
pete10000ft writes:
Fiesty writes"However, his frustration is understandable"
so understandable that it is OK to condone the slaughter of 32 bison as well as the unborn calves?!?!
These are not golden retrievers that got off the leash..this is their income.
Glad I don't live next to you.
November 3, 2008
2:44 p.m.
Suggest removal
COLibertarian writes:
freethought, I tend to agree, but in my case it was Californians.
There was always a quiet but known "justice" that was enacted by locals :-)
November 3, 2008
2:48 p.m.
Suggest removal
pete10000ft writes:
Hey, if it weren't for Texans we wouldn't have had W.
November 3, 2008
2:50 p.m.
Suggest removal
fiesty writes:
freethought- what part of "Hawn should not have done what he did" do you not understand?
To answer your question, (though there's a difference between pet and livestock), if my dog ever got loose, I sure as h*ll would come get him/her when you called to tell me they were on your property- unlike the Downares. If he/she damaged your property, I would pay restitution and help clean it up- unlike the Downares. If he/she ever got out, I would take serious precautions to prevent it happening again- unlike the Downares. However, in the highly unlikely event my dog ever got on your property and menaced you, and you felt threatened for your life, you would be entitled to shoot her- it's called self defense.
Now my question to you- are you honestly trying to tell me that the Downares are completely guiltless in this mess?
November 3, 2008
2:54 p.m.
Suggest removal
pete10000ft writes:
fiesty: YES and any rancher would agree..the only thing the Donwares did wrong was to trust that their neighbor would do the right thing.
November 3, 2008
2:58 p.m.
Suggest removal
Spencer writes:
when you are worth $400 mil you can hire an attorney and make this kind of a deal. That's the system. I'd like to see him do about a year in jail, don't know if he will learn any lesson as it is now.
November 3, 2008
3 p.m.
Suggest removal
cassidy22 writes:
OK, the Downares didn't do enough.
But he shouldn't have KILLED the bison.
Again, Colorado law, he was responsible for putting fencing UP to keep the buffalo OUT. And he should have researched what that meant before he built it. Buffalo need special reinforced steel fencing. Go by a bison farm near you to see what it looks like. High tensile steel wire, welded wire, woven wire, barbed wire, wood posts, t-posts, even hotwire won't work to keep those guys in or out. I don't know what fencing this CEO dude had, but chances are it wasn't enough. If he moved in to that land after the buffalos were already present, he should have put up proper fencing. What works for horses or cows won't work on a buffalo.
I'm not at all excusing anyone's actions - if you care about your livestock, you take care of them and keep them safe. If you care about your land, you take care of it and fence it properly.
Neighborly cooperation on both parties would have resolved this. That's what we do where I live. We talk, we work together, we work it out. The only "neighbors" that don't cooperate with me are the coyotes... ;)
November 3, 2008
3 p.m.
Suggest removal
COLibertarian writes:
feisty
Technically they are!
Where are you finding that the Downares did not work with the neighbors? I have not been able to find that.
I have seen this type of thing happen a few times in the past. It takes 2 sides to work together. Rich neighbor moves in and starts telling everyone else how to run things and how it is going to be in a rural setting. Where I grew up it was with Californians. Now it is with Floridians................... It has little to do with the state they come from but how rural communities co-exist.
November 3, 2008
3:04 p.m.
Suggest removal
fiesty writes:
pete10000ft - once again, I said that what Hawn did was wrong. Got it? However, I stand by my statement, that I can understand the frustration that led to this tragic incident. From all accounts, the Downares were NOT responsible livestock owners, who didn't seem to care at all about their "income". They too had legal responsibilities they did NOT fulfill- C.R.S. § 35-46-102 (2) states that a livestock owner is not always protected from liability when his stock enters another’s land. Firstly, a stock owner who grazes his animals on unfenced land must not place more animals on the land than it can support, with regard to both forage and water. If a landowner’s livestock trespass upon neighboring lands, fenced or unfenced, in search of forage or water, the owner will be liable for the trespass of his or her animals. Secondly, a livestock owner is prohibited from placing his or her livestock upon land which he or she has no right to use. Any stock owner who unlawfully uses unfenced land will be deemed a trespasser and be liable for any damages caused by his or her livestock.
This is what Hawn should have done:
1. Continued his legal proceedings.
2. Taken the bison. It is legal to take custody of livestock found trespassing on your property. Then he could have kept it or, according to Colorado law, the livestock owner may be required to pay reasonable charges incurred in the care of the livestock taken into custody (35-44-102 and 103).
3. Charged the Downares for damages. If his fence meet the "lawful fence" definition, you may "recover damages for trespass and injury to grass, garden or vegetable products or other crops...from the owner of any livestock which breaks through such fence.” (35-46-102)
4. Charged the Downares for half the cost of the fence. If the fence is the boundary between two private pieces of agricultural or grazing property, both landowners share the responsibility for its maintenance. Should your neighbor refuse to participate in its upkeep, you may, after the proper written notice, repair the fence and recover half the cost through civil action. (35-46-112)
November 3, 2008
3:06 p.m.
Suggest removal
dirkle writes:
Attachmate's COMPETITION INCLUDES:
Hewlett-Packard - IBM - Microsoft
and any other companies that provide software used to manage access to enterprise applications and databases, including information stored on mainframes and other legacy systems.
IN OTHER WORDS, BOYCOTT Attachmate until the felon CEO & Lone star carpetbagger is forced to resign or is terminated (without bonuses and parachute), and goes back home.
and to Jeff Hawn, I sing (with Colorado gusto):
...
" ... ♫♫ - here I sit, m'buns a-flexin'
... ♫♫ - givin' birth to another Texan ... ♫♫"
November 3, 2008
3:06 p.m.
Suggest removal
COLibertarian writes:
There have been instances of farmers and ranchers being asked to remove proper fencing for animals such as buffalo by people (urban) not familiar with what it takes to maintain and protect. To them it is not attractive and prohibits "views" or worse yet prohibits wildlife from coming onto their property from those that put up the fence. Cant have it both ways.
November 3, 2008
3:07 p.m.
Suggest removal
fiesty writes:
COLibertarian -
"Where are you finding that the Downares did not work with the neighbors? I have not been able to find that."
In a previous article when the shootings first occurred. Had the dates/times of when Hawn had tried to contact the Downares, then called the sheriff (Jan I think it was), before he finally had to go the legal route. It was on RMN, I'll see if I can find.
November 3, 2008
3:12 p.m.
Suggest removal
fiesty writes:
cassidy22 - you're right, neighborly cooperation should have solved this. But, according to the previous reports, the Downares refused.
Hawn definitely should not have killed the bison; with all my research, he could have sued (and won) against the Downares with ease for damages, trespass, and maintenance of the fence. Here's another law I missed:
C.R.S. § 35-46-102(3) grants that any damages caused by trespassing livestock may be recovered along with the costs of arbitration. The trespassing livestock may also be taken up and held as security for the payment of damages. Finally, in cases where the "...injury complained of has been aggravated and attended by a willful or reckless disregard of the injured person’s rights, the board of arbitration, court, or jury may include reasonable exemplary damages."
C.R.S. § 35-46-102(1) only protects ranchers from the non-willful trespass of stock. Therefore, a livestock owner is liable for damages if he or she willfully drives his or her stock onto the unfenced land of another. If this occurs, the owner of the stock will be held liable for actual and exemplary damages.
Where C.R.S. § 35-46-112 places a duty on landowners to construct and share the cost of partition fences, C.R.S. § 35-46-113 states that it is also their duty to maintain and share the cost of maintaining partition fences. Therefore, unless otherwise agreed, each landowner is responsible for one-half of the cost of repairing any partition fence.
November 3, 2008
3:15 p.m.
Suggest removal
riverrafter writes:
Hawn has bigger problems. What on earth is up with that haircut?
November 3, 2008
3:22 p.m.
Suggest removal
Willy writes:
People are forgetting about the weather conditions that mitigated this situation. It was the worst winter in South Park memory. Many ranchers were snowed in for days. Roads were inpassable. The snow was so packed by melt, refreeze and wind that a 250 # man could walk over an eight foot drift and not hardly leave a footprint.
November 3, 2008
3:23 p.m.
Suggest removal
fiesty writes:
COLibertarian- in the DP's article on this plea, it mentions the following (notice that the letter was dated a month and a half prior to the slaughter, and a week after Downare was served papers of the civil suit- and yet Downare STILL hadn't taken any action!):
"The shootings of the bison came after Hawn and his Denver civil attorney, Stephen Csajaghy, repeatedly complained about Downare's bison damaging Hawn's property.
In a letter dated Jan. 28, Csajaghy told Downare that during the previous six weeks, there had been more than 1,000 head of Downare's bison on Hawn's property. Csajaghy said he had photographic proof that 'your buffalo' have broken through gates and trespassed on Hawn's property on more than 20 occasions in November and December of 2007.
'There has been extensive damage to Mr. Hawn's fences, to his trees and to the grass on his property,' said Csajaghy.
And in the letter, Csajaghy threatened to kill the bison.
'As this problem has continued for the last six weeks and you indicated that you are unsure if you will be able to resolve the issue yourself, we are considering alternate remedies, such as allowing a hunt of any buffalo that come onto Mr. Hawn's property,' wrote Csajaghy. 'However, we would certainly prefer to resolve this problem amicably without having to resort to such action.'
The affidavit notes that 'the massacre of the bison occurred six days after Monte Downare received the paperwork from the civil suit' filed by Hawn."
http://www.denverpost.com/commented/c...
November 3, 2008
3:23 p.m.
Suggest removal
COLibertarian writes:
fiesty,
Those are the reports. 1 side of the story.
I can show you records and documents that show that 1 party did the "proper" communications. I then can provide testimony from multiple parties that show that the "proper' communications were only 1 side of the story and did not contain the full picture. It happens all the time in these types of cases.
I may be wrong on this one, but would wager differently :-)
Move next to a rural neighbor and proceed on telling them on how things are going to be once you move in......................... See how far that goes!!!!!!!
Again not saying this is how it went down but again would wager :-)
November 3, 2008
3:25 p.m.
Suggest removal
psu96 writes:
fiesty,
please provide any documentation proving that the Downares didn't try to help out...facts or your opinion, if you cant STFU.
If Hawn gave the OK to shoot these animals, based on his character I would feel comfortable assuming the Downares tried to be neighborly and HAwn said FU!!!
November 3, 2008
3:33 p.m.
Suggest removal
fiesty writes:
COLibertarian - that's exactly what I was trying to point out, is that there is more than 1 side to the story. Everyone is trying to characterize Hawn as a spoiled millionare who cruelly shot 32 bison without cause. Yet according to the reports, the Downares were, at a minimum, completely irresponsible livestock owners, and at the worst, unresponsive and uncaring neighbors.
psu96 - try acting like an adult and not a foul-mouthed brat. We (readers) can only judge by what we read. According to this, and past, news story, Hawn tried contacting the Downares several times, even had a sherrif visit in Jan, and when all else failed, filed a civil suit. Yet the Downares, who apparently had such little regard for their bison that they were able to escape so many times, STILL couldn't be responsible and take action a month and a half after receiving a letter requesting they do so OR a week after receiving notice of being sued. That sounds like the Downares were the ones using your "F-off, we ain't doin' nothing" attitude.
November 3, 2008
3:35 p.m.
Suggest removal
NeilT writes:
I agree, psu96.
Why didn't Hawn just hire fiesty for representation?
Hawn hired folks to kill these animals only 9 days after he filed a lawsuit. I guess the system is too slow for this turd.
November 3, 2008
3:39 p.m.
Suggest removal
Acemon writes:
classof80 wrote:
"This state has always had freerange for livestock." The key word is "had" because the free range concept was withdrawn many, many years ago. Nobody has the right to allow their livestock to range on somebody else's land. Would you mind if I ran a few steers on your property? Would you protest?
Killing the animals was wrong. Very wrong. However, I can feel some sympathy for Hawn who tried many, many times to resolve the problem. How would you feel in the same situation?
November 3, 2008
3:40 p.m.
Suggest removal
pete10000ft writes:
Fiesty: I SHOULD have won the lottery Saturday but I didn't. You're reasoning regarding this case is specious at best.
Can't fault you for trying but you are WRONG.
November 3, 2008
3:41 p.m.
Suggest removal
JluvDC writes:
Part of the problem that I recall was not only did he shot animals on his own property but he sent his "hunters" onto his neighbor's property and onto federal protected land. He should have waited for his lawsuit to go forward instead of flipping out and deciding to kill innocent animals. He didn't and he therefore deserves to have the book thrown at him. You can't go around shooting stuff just cause you are frustrated!
November 3, 2008
3:44 p.m.
Suggest removal
terra writes:
freethought...every state has folks like you. Here we call them rednecks, and most people just roll their eyes when someone like you starts foaming at the mouth. Why, you're so special you even have your own theme song...up against the wall, redneck mutha...
November 3, 2008
3:46 p.m.
Suggest removal
pete10000ft writes:
Acemon writes: " I can feel some sympathy for Hawn who tried many, many times to resolve the problem"
read the story ace:"Nine days before, Hawn had filed a lawsuit against his neighbor, Monte Downare, charging that Downare allowed the bison to trample his property and destroy his fences."
So if you don't get legal satisfaction, by way of mending a fence mind you, in 9 DAYS its OK to slaughter 32 animals?
gimme a break...you and fiesty are from TX aren't you? ;)
November 3, 2008
3:49 p.m.
Vampyre writes:
(This comment was removed by the site staff.)
November 3, 2008
3:49 p.m.
Suggest removal
NeilT writes:
They're from Highlands Ranch, Pete!
November 3, 2008
3:59 p.m.
Suggest removal
COLibertarian writes:
fiesty,
Again, You and I usually agree, but in this instance we will have to agree to disagree.
Am I prejudiced in this case? Heck ya. I have witnessed over and over again how people not familiar with rural living come into an area and take it over, or attempt to take it over. In most cases that I have witnessed, the "urban" dictate how this is to work. This happens with livestock in cases like this, and other items such as roads and water rights.
I have seen this with Ted and Jane Turner, Bobby Knight, LA bigwigs and I would put money on it that this dude did it also. Alienate the locals and see how far the neighborly thing works for you.
Native American communities LOVED Costner when he did "Dances with Wolves" That love soon turned to hatred when he screwed the locals over after that.
Anothe piece of article said that over 1000 head of buffalo on his property. Ever seen a 1000 head of cattle, let alone buffalo in 1 spot?
Trail 500 head of cattle over any distance. How long is that line and how many acres does it take to hold that many at 1 time. Then double it.............Very doubtful
November 3, 2008
4:11 p.m.
Suggest removal
dirkle writes:
Attachmate can be contacted here:
http://www.attachmate.com/Worldwide/A...
November 3, 2008
4:16 p.m.
Suggest removal
Devil_Dog writes:
willy
I do not beleive, nor did i say all or even most CEO's are bad people. I did say that this ceo and people like him are one of this country's bigest problems. We have too many people that think they can do whatever they want and no one will call them on it.
It could be something as simple as people driving west on Orchard Rd who do it every afternoon on their way home flying past all the fools in the right lane (even though they know that the left lane must turn left and they want to go straight) then they force their way in to the right lane (across a solid white line) ahead of all the foolish people who are dumb enough to do it the correct way.
Too many people today think they are entitled to things that they are not, and the sheep of the world let them have their way because it's easier, or their afraid to stand up to the jerks.
Enough is Enough
November 3, 2008
4:16 p.m.
Suggest removal
COLibertarian writes:
freethought never been called a redneck?
Dang, dude I have......at least on here.......until they see me in person.....Then I am nothing but a dang hippie....LOL
November 3, 2008
4:18 p.m.
Suggest removal
Heidi writes:
I wonder why Vampyre comes to Co if he hates it so much.
November 3, 2008
4:20 p.m.
Suggest removal
COLibertarian writes:
Heidi
He keeps hearing the references to sheep on here.........Why do you think I am here.........They got too fast and too smart from where I came from :-)
November 3, 2008
4:23 p.m.
Suggest removal
Heidi writes:
Devil_Dog writes:
"It could be something as simple as people driving west on Orchard Rd who do it every afternoon on their way home flying past all the fools in the right lane (even though they know that the left lane must turn left and they want to go straight) then they force their way in to the right lane (across a solid white line) ahead of all the foolish people who are dumb enough to do it the correct way."
Too funny! That is my worst pet peeve - to put it nicely! But at least some of them turn on their turn signals to let you know you'd better get out of their way!
November 3, 2008
4:23 p.m.
Suggest removal
mytwosense writes:
JlovDC: "You can't go around shooting stuff just cause you are frustrated!"
Well, that's not exactly true. You can if you're a multimillionaire with the bucks to buy your way out of any legal consequences.
November 3, 2008
4:26 p.m.
Suggest removal
Heidi writes:
COLib,
So you were herded into Colorado?
I love some of the Texans, the ones who are family members. And they do come to Colorado and contribute to our tourism!
November 3, 2008
4:27 p.m.
Suggest removal
Willy writes:
Damn Devil - we drive the same street. I agree about people feeling entitled. I just get tired of hearing all of the complaining about how evil business is when it is our economy.
November 3, 2008
4:54 p.m.
Suggest removal
Devil_Dog writes:
Yeah
I'm usually cussing a blue streak for a mile or two then I calm down just in time to pick up my daughter from daycare for the ride home.
Not enough peole today got a good smack on the behind from their parents when they deserved it. Nothing like immediate and just punishment to keep you on the straight and narrow.
November 3, 2008
4:57 p.m.
Suggest removal
Devil_Dog writes:
Heidi
Maybe we could hire some of this idiots buddies to take a few pot shots at them to teach them better manners!
Naw that would make us almost as bad as he is...
November 3, 2008
5:23 p.m.
Suggest removal
Heidi writes:
No matter what we try to teach them or how, they will never change their selfish attitudes!
November 3, 2008
5:33 p.m.
Suggest removal
Acemon writes:
pete10000ft,
Your assumption that I'm from Texas is as wrong as your take on the story. Try a different way to belittle me.
The animals repeatedly trampled Hawn's land. He talked with them many times to try to resolve the problem, to no avail. His neighbors responded to his lawsuit by doing absolutely nothing, which resulted in further tresspass and damage. How long would you put up with it? What if your neighbor had a dog that frequently escaped their yard and bit you every time it was out? Would you keep calling the cops or might you get a gun and shoot the dog? I know what my answer would be. Bang! No more problem and no more danger.
November 3, 2008
5:46 p.m.
Suggest removal
cedykeman1 writes:
What I don't get is, why would a bunch of guys- the hunters agree to do this deed? permission or not. Either they are just a bunch of morons with guns that finally had an excuse to shoot their rifles, or well there isn't another thing. A true hunter would never partake in this slaughter.
I know a guy that likes to go pheasant hunting-- no prob with me--- but what he did was wait next to a truck and blast them as they were released into the wild. Didn't even go looking for them-- he knew that some agency like the department of wildlife or something was releasing them that day- and he knew where at. Legal? yes. Morally right- no!
Doesn't anyone that owns a rifle have any sense of what is right and wrong anymore?
November 3, 2008
5:46 p.m.
Suggest removal
Existentalism writes:
The sentence should have been 10 years in jail and 2 years probation.
This pig, who, just like all CEOs think they are above the law.
Well, this pig will pay monetarily for this one and hopefully serve jail time.
Now if only we could sentence the crooked CEOs on wall street to about 50 years in prison for what they have done to America and to Americans.
November 3, 2008
5:48 p.m.
Suggest removal
cherokee writes:
As a former resident of Park County I well remember the Downares and their running roughshod over anyone who happened to get in their way. No, their bison shouldn't have been shot, but maybe the Downares will learn to care about others also.
November 3, 2008
6:38 p.m.
Suggest removal
eh03 writes:
What a terrible tragedy this was. Regardless of the people who were or were not within their legal rights, Mr. Hawn's "solution" was outrageously heavyhanded, disrespectful, & cruel- not to mention wasteful.
Let's not lose sight of the main issue here, which I believe is the fact that Mr. Hawn appears to be one of the many unfortunate people with more money than class or integrity. This in no way relates to his current city of residence, folks.
I've lived in Denver for over 20 years now, but grew up on a ranch in Texas and still have family there. Texas remains a heavy ag & ranch state, where the majority of people have enormous respect for the land, animals & natural resources. This event, had it happened in rural TX, would have illicited just as strong an outcry there. Believing that state lines/borders actually create totally different people and mindsets is just a lack of critical thinking and common sense.
I encouorage all concerned to send this story to the Austin paper and media for re-printing. I imagine locals in a town known for its activism could make Mr. Hawn's daily life a lot more uncomfortable than we can from 1000 miles away.
Good people and bad people come from everywhere. Getting whipped into a lather about whether Hawn is an as*hole from Boulder or an as*hole from Austin diminishes the real tragedy here. Mr. Hawn and his ilk have no business playing "gentleman rancher" in Colorado- or anywhere.
November 3, 2008
6:51 p.m.
Suggest removal
Vampyre writes:
Heidi, If I didn't come to Colorado how would I see you, and pay you your monthly stipened we agreed on for those favors you have been giving me.
The reason Texas doesn't float off into the Gulf of Mexico is simply because Oklahoma, and Colorado s&^k soo damn hard to keep it into place!
November 3, 2008
7:07 p.m.
Suggest removal
Heidi writes:
Vampyre,
I don't have anything against Texans, and in one of my posts above, I said that I love some of them. I don't know all of them, of course.
You don't own me anything. I enjoy it as much as you do.
November 3, 2008
7:11 p.m.
Suggest removal
bythereever writes:
Acemon-
I assume this guy knew of Colorado's open range laws and he should have been prepared to abide by them when he decided to build his trophy house next to a bison ranch.
I can't stand people who decide to move to the country and then try to impose their city restrictions on the folks who have been ranching the land in the area for decades, if not generations. Who do these people think they are? It was this guy's job to fence the animals out of his land if he wanted to keep them out. If they were able to get through the fence, HE NEEDED TO BUILD A BETTER FENCE!
It's not the rancher's legal responsibility to fence them in, it's the ceo's job to fence them OUT. What part of that don't you get, Acemon?
November 3, 2008
7:20 p.m.
Suggest removal
bythereever writes:
Acemon- I just saw your first post, you really don't know about the open range law, do you? You need to edjeecate yourself, hoss.
November 3, 2008
7:45 p.m.
Suggest removal
bythereever writes:
OK I just looked up the open range statute, looks like I needed a little edjeecation myself. I'm not above eating a little crow, but killing the rancher's livestock was definitely NOT a right this guy had. If he found livestock on his land that had broken through his "lawful" fence, he had the right to confiscate it but then would be legally responsible for the care and feeding of it. I doubt if the legal definition of care includes pumping 30.06 rounds into it.
November 3, 2008
8:53 p.m.
Suggest removal
dlwr writes:
Oh look, money does solve everything. Of course, money caused the whole thing. Just because you have a thick wad in your wallet doesn't mean your not a big wad. You still live with the rest of us in the real world...unless you have turned into Micheal Jackson living in Neverland. Welcome back to some sort of reality.
November 3, 2008
9:58 p.m.
Suggest removal
The_Punnisher writes:
The only " Golden Rule " this CEO understands is:
" He who has the GOLD, makes the rules "...
I think he should spend that 10 days in a Park County Jail swabbing toilets....
It just might teach him a little humility....But then he is a Texan and may not have it to begin with..
I see another subject for a South Park episode...>8-)...
November 3, 2008
11:57 p.m.
Suggest removal
Otter writes:
Just one look at this guy and you can tell he is a certified SOB deserving of a royal a$$ kicking. He’d be smart to watch his back or leave town.
November 4, 2008
7:32 a.m.
Suggest removal
fiesty writes:
Acemon- give it up. These people are so blind they can only see one side of the story- they are rooting for one person to get punished for their deeds, but are giving the other party, who also did wrong, a free pass. I just hope that now Hawn has paid the price for his act, that he turns around and sue the pants off the Downares. He has sufficient grounds, evidence, and the law to back him up.
November 4, 2008
7:47 a.m.
Suggest removal
Heidi writes:
fiesty,
I'm with you on this one. I've read the laws you cited. I wonder how people would feel if Hawn was the one with the bison and the same scenario ensued.
November 4, 2008
8:11 a.m.
Suggest removal
NotUrFriend writes:
Fiesty,
If he had all those things to 'back' him up he would not have plea bargained. If he had all those listed items to 'back him up' his lawyer would have advised against it, sought recovery fees, court fees, lawyer fees, public apologies from the county police department, the Downare family, the local branchs of government, and prabably all the fresh bison for target practice he could handle.
So........Call me nutty, but I'm siding with the sitting judge who has commited part of his life to the study, practice, and judgement of law.
Call me a looney, sure.
I.
November 4, 2008
8:17 a.m.
Suggest removal
NotUrFriend writes:
Fiesty
That's not to say I do not agree with you that land rights and property law, local, and state, were not stepped on regarding trespassing. But over all, it's obvious which of the parties here suffered the bigger loss.
I am confidant that the company Hawn operates for likely pressured him for good public relations. Either way, from what I've gathered, the bigger ground for suite would hav been against Hawn.
Just my $.02 :)
I.
November 4, 2008
8:19 a.m.
Suggest removal
Heidi writes:
Hey MyFriend, you're looney! Satisfied? ;)
I think it was terrible what he did to those bison and he should not get away with that. Neither should the so called "hunters". But he is not the only guilty party here.
November 4, 2008
8:24 a.m.
Suggest removal
Heidi writes:
MyFriend,
Your two cents makes sense!
November 4, 2008
8:51 a.m.
Suggest removal
fiesty writes:
NotUrFriend - I think you misunderstood the items to back him up. I didn't mean for this trial; Hawn deserved punishment. What I mean is for a separate case. Under Colorado law, (and common sense), he can (and should have waited to) go to court for the damage the Downare's bison caused to his property as well as 1/2 the cost for the fence.
Heidi put it well- Hawn is not the only guilty party here. BOTH Hawn and Downare need to be prosecuted under the law.
November 4, 2008
9:22 a.m.
Suggest removal
Employee73 writes:
As an employee of the company you would like to boycott....I would like to say Thank You. It is so nice to know that people care more about the bison than they do about human beings possibly losing jobs. It will be even more appreciated when I am using your tax dollars to pay for food and healthcare for my children.
We don't have to agree or disagree with anything the CEO does. Right or wrong what he made was a personal choice during his personal time. What exactly do you expect to accomplish by boycotting the company he works for?
Also, feel free to email all you like. The emails are ignored and immediately deleted. If you would like to waste your time sending hateful emails to people who have nothing to do with this and will never be read by anyone...especially the CEO of the company....be my guest. But you would think that people would find better things to do.
November 4, 2008
10:28 a.m.
Suggest removal
Employee73 writes:
freethought, do you really think that is a valid comparison? One has nothing to do with the other. So attempting to punish the company he works for only hurts employees and is completely ridiculous. Which was my point to begin with.
November 4, 2008
10:36 a.m.
Suggest removal
NotUrFriend writes:
Employee73,
I strongely doubt you represent a true employee of the said company and are likely a bored poster here on the forum trying to argue your own point of view, shallow or otherwise. Let me point out how I've come to that conclusion:
First, what type of employee would so poor represent its company in the way you have? Pointing out that "your compliants, views, and opinions to the company shall henceforth be fully and completely ingored." What type of company would permit its self rightous employees so much free will to decide and dictate company policy?
Are you the personal that handles consumer complaints? If so, your terrible at it. IF ....AND I SAID IF*** it were your companies policies to ignore or disregard feedback by its consumers or possible consumers it'd be retarded...I repeat, Retarded** and complete Public relation suicide to openly admit to such. So, if your an employee, please advise your superiors of your actions so you can be quickly terminated.
Second: An employee for any company is held accountable for personal time if it intrudes into company image and public relations. I work full time for a financial company here in the heart of Denver, and we all sign waivers agreeing to 'limit impact on community relations" that would directly effect business functions of the company.
I'd imagine the terrible impact so crude and illegal behavior might directly have on your company. I'd imagine protocal would require some punishment be made. At least....as a business based person, such as myself, I'd imagine that some action would be taken internally.
Call me nutty, but your a fake. Sorry, just calling you out on that.
I.
November 4, 2008
10:40 a.m.
Suggest removal
NotUrFriend writes:
Employee,
Oh, I will not go into argueing your employment. Any real employee would not bother, btw. Just helping you save face a bit.
:)
Have a good election day.
I.
November 4, 2008
10:50 a.m.
Suggest removal
Employee73 writes:
Not ur friend, If your complaints, views or opinions had anything to do with actual business, they would of course be addressed post haste. Comments or responses on personal business of company employees would be completely unprofessional on our part, and having said that you are "business based" I should think you would know that already. Feel free to call out all you want.
November 4, 2008
11:05 a.m.
Suggest removal
NotUrFriend writes:
Employee, (Sorry, thought I'd defend that point again)
Business based common sense would dictate surrendering internal protocal and policies relating to business conduct standards would never be openly shared with non-employee. Heck, a great deal of it is not even shared with half the employees.
Thats why they (Employers) make you sign waivers during initial employment to secure protection of company property, physical and intellectual.
So? You just surrendered those internal policies, in a rude, public, and unprofessional capacity.
Being I AM a person employed in the financial markets and work directly with Public Affairs and consumer relations daily, I do know these things........I'm not blowing smoke up your Arse here buddy.
Honestly.
Have a safe election day my friend.
I.
November 4, 2008
11:08 a.m.
Suggest removal
JINX writes:
I have nothing against hunting and even enjoy bird hunting. But I have to ask, who went up there and shot these animals dead and just left them to lay there. Was this hunting or sport? This was inhumane murder of animals. I question the thought process and mentality of a bunch of guys with rifles laying waste to standing animals. It;sthe equivalent of hitting cattle with ball pean hammers. I think the hunters (Killers) should take some responsibilty in the mass killing of these animal, and NO I'm not a bleeding heart.
November 4, 2008
12:12 p.m.
Suggest removal
NotUrFriend writes:
Jinx,
If these we're someone's pets (Dogs, cats) the uproar nationwide would astronomical. I'd be part of that uproar. Bleeding heart or not, its good to have human beings out there acting humans. I dislike hunters and the concept of it being referred to as a 'sport' myself, but I appreciate the fact that it has, and will continue to be done. I just refuse to take part in it.
Sports...I dont consider golf or pool a 'sport' as its more a technically advance game with a good deal of rules that govern it. Like Chess, or Chinese checkers.....or even some of these more advanced 3-D games.
Personally, being a boxer, wrestler, and Martial arts supporter, I find it hard to classify it as any type of sport. Maybe its because I've had knuckles displaced and teeth knocked out, or, in return, shoved shoulders out of sockets....That I disagree with the term sport. But to each they're own. I've never killed an animal before, but I've killed two adult men in self defense before. 'Sport hunting' wise that's about it for me.
These hunter's ought to be charged with not logically considering the legal aspects of what they took part of. deceitful or otherwise, possession of the weapon is 9/10th of the law.
I.
November 4, 2008
12:56 p.m.
Suggest removal
wow writes:
If I remember right, the hunters were given immunity. They gladly rolled over on Hawn, and told the authorities everything, having been bilked out of the fees they paid him for the hunt and the meat they were supposed to take home.
Evidently, they had no clue that 1) these bison weren't Hawn's, 2) He was going to stampeede them or 3), they weren't going to be able to remove the meat. they got ripped off, thinking it was going to be a legitimate hunt.
Texans.
Go figure.
November 4, 2008
1:05 p.m.
Suggest removal
JINX writes:
Killing 32 bison while they stand in a field is a legitimate hunt? I'm sorry, again nothing against hunting, standing at the rear of a truck sighting your rifle in on 32 bison is not a hunt. Unless shooting a bunch of cattle is anyone's idea of a great chase, this can't be classified hunting. This isn't the wild west and this mentality is the one reason that bison remain in the number they do. Hunt all you want, but don't call a massacre of stupid animals standing near a hole in a fence hunting. The hunters knew this when it took probably 15 minutes to knock them all down.
November 4, 2008
1:08 p.m.
Suggest removal
Heidi writes:
I wasn't aware of that, wow. But I'm not counting on their stories to be fact. People will say anything to get themselves out of trouble. Hunters are supposed to know the laws and where they are (part of it was federal land) before they start shooting animals.
November 4, 2008
1:20 p.m.
Suggest removal
NotUrFriend writes:
Heidi,
I agree. If you own a gun your obligated to understand and appreciate the laws....By following them. Discharging a firearm in any fashion must be conducted professionally and rationally. Unfortunately, to many gun owners are very flawed at both.
Jinx,
Agreed. The Bison were to dumb to realize what was happening. I doubt they moved much except a handful of paces away from the sound of the gun discharging. And I scarely think an 800 lb 5 - 6 foot wide animal standing perfectly stationary is a genuine target. It's certainly not a sport.
Now CLAY TARGET shoting...THAT Is tough.
I.
November 4, 2008
1:20 p.m.
Suggest removal
psu96 writes:
flush twice Texas needs the water
November 4, 2008
1:33 p.m.
Suggest removal
wow writes:
psu96.....rotflmao.....
I'm not defending the "hunters", just relaying information that may or may not be accurate, relying on memory.
However, I don't know if any of you have ever paid to go on a hunt, but many people do. They pay big bucks, and rely on the honesty and knowledge of the guide/landowner to get them their money's worth. Being from Texas, these guys have probably never seen a bison ranch, or bison for that matter. If they are telling the truth, they have a legitimate gripe, and I hope they turn around and sue Hawn for expenses.
But, IMHO, no one that dumb should be shooting at anything bigger than a pop can, anyway.
November 4, 2008
1:59 p.m.
Suggest removal
NotUrFriend writes:
WOW,
I was hoping to get ahold of you. Would you mind emailing me? Its regarding that Dog Meat request I put up on the other story. I'd like to talk to you if you have a moment regarding your post about the puppies being eating over near Federal and Alameda.
Thanks.
I.
November 4, 2008
2:18 p.m.
Suggest removal
wow writes:
noturfriend----
No problem, just sent.
Take it easy.
November 4, 2008
2:49 p.m.
Suggest removal
NotUrFriend writes:
wow,
Thanks, I look forward to talking to you. Thanks.
Being a dog owner this is rather horrifying and disgusting. How sick, how very disgusting to even fathom. If they choose to immigrate to OUR country, they should adopt OUR standards. We don't eat dogs here.
I.
PS: I wont respond to anyone else making the case on this. Thanks.
November 4, 2008
5:05 p.m.
Suggest removal
cassidy22 writes:
As for the hunters - sometimes people will do a lot of things for money, they should have known better, too.
Again, not saying who is right and who is wrong. but if those Bison had been allowed to graze on that land for a length of time - they will challenge any fence. Livestock are creatures of routine - if something works for them, they try it over and over. Ask my sheep who would squiggle through barbed wire to get to a chunk of land they liked. It took electric fencing to keep them out of the fruit tree orchard we planted. They'll keep trying to go places until they really just can't. SO these guys not only needed fencing, they needed fencing that would WIN when challenged by a herd of buffs.
Again, bad neighbors on both sides. Keep your animals safe, and don't kill what isn't yours to kill.
November 7, 2008
6:22 a.m.
Suggest removal
tashunka1876 writes:
Mr. Hawn certainly had better ways and time of dealing with this situation. I do not know anything about this man, nor do I want to. This is a clear case of flexing money and power. It's so sad and unfortunate that these beautiful animals were slaughtered at all. We are not living in the 1800's. But apparently, Mr. Hawn thought playing Cowboys and Indians was the way to go. I try not to make a habit of judging people I do not know. Mr. Hawn seems like a cold, mean, and unhappy man. Money cannot buy you happiness. He has proven that. If possible, I wish it could buy him a conscious and heart. I doubt you've learned anything from this Mr. Hawn. "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men." I believe that quote. Men like you always prove it true. Rose L
November 10, 2008
2:21 p.m.
Suggest removal
wolfam76 writes:
First off the hunters were not hired. They were given permission to hunt the buffalo on the property. They were under the impression that they were hunting the property of Hawn. Why don't you think there were not any charges against them. Not their fault.
As far as fences go, Hawn had an adequate fence to keep to keep livestock out as it was inspected by a federal agent. Now bison is not a normal livestock animal. It is not a domestic animal. They can run up to 40 miles an hour. They can jump around 6 feet. There is a saying about bison, "You can get a bison to go anywhere he wants to go." You can't round up bison the same way you round up cattle.
Why do you think Downare took the deal. I feel he knew that if the case went on any longer then a lot of other things would start to come into play and he may not have gotten anything out of the deal. He was in the wrong for allowing his bison destroy what ever it wanted. Some were found on federal land ie; Forest Service and BLM. That is illegal unless you have a permit from these agencies for your animals to be on there to graze. He did not have any such permits.
Downare is as much to blame as Hawn.