Game Wardens and Property Rights

[Jaylegger]

Just to play devil's advocate and stir the pot it bit, it sounds like you're more ok with an uninvited and probable illegal hunter on your property (you've already stated you're aware who it is therefore you must have suspicions he's hunting illegally) than you are with those employed and paid by tax payers such as yourself for the purpose of preventing this illegal activity. If the game warden threatened to burn your house down if you didn't comply would he then garner the same, I'll look the other way this one time, respect you've unwillingly allotted to the suspect?

 

[scesnick]

In Ohio all they have to say is they are conducting an investigation. Such as in an open gate that is normally closed
This is from the Ohio Revised Code 1531.14:
Any person regularly employed by the division of wildlife for the purpose of conducting research and investigation of game or fish or their habitat conditions or engaged in restocking game or fish or in any type of work involved in or incident to game or fish restoration projects or in the enforcement of laws or division rules relating to game or fish, or in the enforcement of section 1531.29 or 3767.32 of the Revised Code, other laws prohibiting the dumping of refuse in or along streams, or watercraft laws, while in the normal, lawful, and peaceful pursuit of such investigation, work, or enforcement may enter upon, cross over, be upon, and remain upon privately owned lands for such purposes and shall not be subject to arrest for trespass while so engaged or for such cause thereafter.

This explains that they are allowed on private lands ONLY with probable cause. Not just because they are special and above the law like so many of them like to claim.

 

[archerm3]

Which part do you think is a good thing? That the state claims to own the game or that the wardens can go anywhere that might have game on it?

I agree with both.

 

[scesnick]

Just to play devil's advocate and stir the pot it bit, it sounds like you're more ok with an uninvited and probable illegal hunter on your property (you've already stated you're aware who it is therefore you must have suspicions he's hunting illegally) than you are with those employed and paid by tax payers such as yourself for the purpose of preventing this illegal activity. If the game warden threatened to burn your house down if you didn't comply would he then garner the wardens the same, I'll look the other way this one time, respect you've unwillingly allotted to the suspect?

Not at all. I am also in the law enforcement field and I do not condone ANY illegal actvity.
Maybe I should explain that the illegal road hunter was NOT doing so on my property.. He was doing it on the road leading to my property. I have since told this clown to never come onto my property. The DNR pretty much knew who the illegal hunter was, but they wanted myself or my wife to confirm this and i was not willing to do so at the time.
I live way, way back in the woods and I know what these people who poach deer are capable of and I am NOT willing to put my property and/or family in a periless situation just so the DNR can fine some poacher. It is NOT worth it.
The DNR can not force me put my family in that situation but that is exactly what they were trying to force me to do.

I have had other run in with the DNR that is highly questionable.

 

[N80]

Kinda a weird situation... we want them to keep an eye on things, bust poachers, etc... but we don't want them on our property without permission.

Yes, its a conundrum. How the officials respond to that conundrum is a big part of it. I've been hunting in this specific area for over 20 years. I've owned land here for 7 years. This is the first game warden I've met here and he was on my property uninvited when there were no signs that anyone was or had been hunting there. We've had problems with poaching and trespassing in the past but only the sheriff responds, not the DNR. We've called about poachers, baiting, road hunting etc and we are always told that there are no wardens available to respond or investigate. So that sours the relationship a little you know?

But again, none of this crossed my mind at the time. This guy was very nice and like I said, I invited him back. In fact, he will probably be a guest at my cabin next months when we have a 'skeet shoot' for the groom's friends. So I'm not knocking this young man or his job. I'm glad their here. I know we need them and I know things would be a mess if they weren't doing what they do.

That does not mean that I/we can't question the whys and wherefores about how they do it. In fact, it is the duty of a good citizen, in my opinion, to know what the law is and which ones are good and which ones are not. And then change the bad ones.

And SC is a state that has a checkered history when it comes to game laws. Fortunately many of them are getting ironed out but only via the courts it seems.

So sure, we want them around when we need them and not around when we don't. Its a tough position to be in. But if I have to give up some of my rights for them to do their job, it isn't unreasonable to expect them to handle that tough job well.

(And as a frame of reference, my dad was an ATF agent for 20 years, so I've seen both sides of the issue through his experiences.)

 

[whistlepig]

Protect a poacher. Run off the DNR. And then name those that don't do this "sheeple"?

 

[Jaylegger]

Not at all. I am also in the law enforcement field and I do not condone ANY illegal actvity.
Maybe I should explain that the illegal road hunter was NOT doing so on my property.. He was doing it on the road leading to my property. I have since told this clown to never come onto my property. The DNR pretty much knew who the illegal hunter was, but they wanted myself or my wife to confirm this and i was not willing to do so at the time.
I live way, way back in the woods and I know what these people who poach deer are capable of and I am NOT willing to put my property and/or family in a periless situation just so the DNR can fine some poacher. It is NOT worth it.
The DNR can not force me put my family in that situation but that is exactly what they were trying to force me to do.

I have had other run in with the DNR that is highly questionable.

Understood. Considering the circumstances that you've had a previous questionable run in with this guy it's not out of the question his intent if perhaps not to purposely put you and your family in harms way with his actions he's not taking reasonable precautions to prevent it . If there's even a slim chance that's the case I'd go after him with both barrels blazing, figuratively speaking of course.

 

[scesnick]

So I'm not knocking this young man or his job. I'm glad their here. I know we need them and I know things would be a mess if they weren't doing what they do.

That does not mean that I/we can't question the whys and wherefores about how they do it. In fact, it is the duty of a good citizen, in my opinion, to know what the law is and which ones are good and which ones are not. And then change the bad ones.

.)

Great post, That is all I am saying also. I have called them ( anonomously) a few times about poachers. We do need the DNR to keep some type of order and to keep the hunting laws intact and enforced. What we do NOT need are DNR officers that go above the law and start to take advantage of the private citizen rights in the name of game law enforcement.

 

[N80]

I agree with both.

I think most people probably do and that's fine, but I also don't think most people think about it very deeply either. And we're fortunate that so far in this great country we don't have to worry so much about the powers we confer on our officials.

And that is why it is easy to be complacent. The other reason for complacency is that most of us are good decent people and we genuinely don't have anything to hide. But both of these forms of complacency can be dangerous to freedom when we fail to understand two basic things. 1) Most governments will, at some time or another, exceed the rights granted to them by the people and 2) many good and decent activities that people consider to be their right to pursue can be deemed illegal by the government.

And if all an official has to do is prove that you have wild animals on your property in order to come onto it and inspect it, then you may have little recourse.

It might sound alarmist and paranoid, but very few governments in all of history have not done this very thing.

 

[scesnick]

Protect a poacher. Run off the DNR. And then name those that don't do this "sheeple"?

???????