Volunteer Ranger Masters @ Waddell Creek?

[Sagaba]

See last post.

Read More

 

[not nipsy]

Actually, you won't get much out of reporting him
He's actually done some good, and DNR likes him.

I agree he's gruff and bossy. He's there almost entirely to keep people from littering, and gross negligence such as lighting the woods on fire. As a range officer, I don't think he gets involved beyond that.

By the way, if you go shooting elsewhere on the mountain and haul out your trash, you can leave it by the yellow gate at the Waddell triangle pit and DNR will haul it off. Heard that straight from a DNR officer up at the top of the mountain.

 

[Sagaba]

See last post.

 

[Sagaba]

See last post.

 

[not nipsy]

Wow. The last time I shot at Waddell was a lot different. The most he said to me was "you make sure those hulls get in this bucket", and handed me a 5 gallon bucket. Then he sat in his truck the whole time. I'm pretty sure I was shooting whatever was left out there, plus a target on the side of a cardboard box, so maybe I didn't give him anything to yell about. There were no target holders. This was probably about 2 years ago. I'm pretty sure Frank started off as a brass vulture a few years ago, and he was unfriendly then, too.

Here's what I was able to find:
[email protected] is the DNR Public Use manager for our district
[email protected]. is the volunteer coordinator for cap. forest

Before you email them, though, read this. It's WAC 332-52-145:
(4) What may be used as a target?

(a) Items that are commercially manufactured for the specific purpose of target shooting or similar targets privately manufactured by the person(s) engaging in target shooting that are consistent with this section.

(b) Unauthorized targets include but are not limited to:

(i) Natural features, except earthen berms or banks used as backstops for target shooting;

(ii) Vegetation;

(iii) Structures;

(iv) Gates;

(v) Vehicles;

(vi) Signs;

(vii) Other department improvements;

(viii) Appliances;

(ix) Furniture;

(x) Glass;

(xi) Privately owned or occupied structures;

(xii) Pets, service animals or livestock;

(xiii) Wildlife;

(xiv) Explosive and incendiary items;

(xv) Garbage of any kind.

Persons shall not target shoot at unauthorized targets.

"Garbage of any kind" is pretty much a catch all. It's likely that they'll back Frank up on this one. However, there's no harm in telling them.

 

[Sagaba]

See last post.

 

[Riot]

I get that the waterbottle is banned. We went and re-read the sign on the way out. That's fine. It's the way he handled it that is unacceptable.

So to sum up this entire thread...

"I didn't follow the rules and didn't want to listen to a cranky old guy preaching to me so I want to know who to complain to."

 

[Sagaba]

No. That's actually not it. You must have missed how rude he was before I ever even uncased my guns or spoke a single word. Take it how you will but as a appointed steward of that pit he is a point of authority to be looked up to, not scared by. The friend with me was a first time shooter and was put off by the whole thing so right there we may have lost a fellow sportsman in the future. That in a nutshell in the point that I tried to make clear. It's not the rules I disagree with...it's how they are unprofessionally enforced by this man.

 

[Flyingswords]

Unless you know an LEO familiar with the laws of BLM land and laws regarding the use of firearms and keeping your own spent shells and whatnot, hes gonna be nothing but trouble if that LEO isnt with you when youre there to hold him at bay. All he is just a volunteer, not an actual paid employee.

 

[not nipsy]

So send an email! I think you've got the right idea, and the right tone. Something like "Hey, I appreciate the clear rules and and I'm glad DNR encourages a volunteer there to help keep the Waddell pit clean and safe, but let me tell you how things went the other day ....".

Post the response here - I'm curious to see where the DNR managers come down on this.

edit: huh, not sure why you deleted all your prior posts, Sagaba. You actually had a point worth discussing.