Well, we can all argue what the law is until we are blue in the face. But, I can tell you that in practice wildlife officers in this state get a lot of leeway in enforcing wildlife laws. Exigent circumstance can be as wide as a barn door if that is historically accepted procedure for enforcement. The seasoned hunters in this state know full well that the wildlife officers here can get right in the middle of your business, whether it is right or not.
Not a hunter but a question just crossed my mind
- Thread starter cslinger
- Start date
A traffic cop lawfully needs cause to pull you over, but that doesn't mean its not easily abused. That doesn't change what the law is.
Expectation of privacy issues are not much different than looking in the windows of your car, to visibly spot "reasonable cause" for a search. Same applies to open land. He cannot wander onto private land looking for violations. Anything he can see that "might be a volation" without setting foot on your land, may contitute probable cause to enter your land.
Game warden at son's hunter safety class clarifed teh myth here that you could enter private property without permission to track a wounded. He said its not only false, but that HE did not have the authority to enter private land to retrieve. He encouraged hunters to call the GW office if they killed a deer that died on neighboring property, and could not get permission to retrieve it, and he would intercede and talk with the property owner, and offer to accompny you, but said, if the owner is unwilling to give permission, he can't enter either.
I have no doubts that some agencies frequenty violate Constitutional rights as a matter of policy, and they mostly get away with it because most people don't have the means or knowledge to legally challenge it. The US Constitution applies to ALL government agents, state, federal, and local, whther they obey it or not.
Expectation of privacy issues are not much different than looking in the windows of your car, to visibly spot "reasonable cause" for a search. Same applies to open land. He cannot wander onto private land looking for violations. Anything he can see that "might be a volation" without setting foot on your land, may contitute probable cause to enter your land.
Game warden at son's hunter safety class clarifed teh myth here that you could enter private property without permission to track a wounded. He said its not only false, but that HE did not have the authority to enter private land to retrieve. He encouraged hunters to call the GW office if they killed a deer that died on neighboring property, and could not get permission to retrieve it, and he would intercede and talk with the property owner, and offer to accompny you, but said, if the owner is unwilling to give permission, he can't enter either.
I have no doubts that some agencies frequenty violate Constitutional rights as a matter of policy, and they mostly get away with it because most people don't have the means or knowledge to legally challenge it. The US Constitution applies to ALL government agents, state, federal, and local, whther they obey it or not.
tahunua001
New member
and here is where I probably get this thread shut down, with civil disobedience and all, but historically accepted behavior has no bearing on legal and illegal, right and wrong. just because militaries have just about always raped their way across whatever country they are fighting in, does not mean that rape is a condoned, or legal action for individual soldiers to take. just because there are still isolated areas in the US where it is still legal to beat your wife on the city hall steps on sunday mornings does not mean it is the right thing to do. people should not just sit aside and watch as LEOs of any department run amock for no other reason than "it's always been like this".
buck460XVR
New member
For the most part, rouge Wardens that break more laws than they enforce are like similar rouge cops.....far and few between. While some would like others to think that those in law enforcement have no respect for the law themselves, this is not the case. Most Game Wardens are hard working individuals that have a lot of territory to cover. They are exposed everyday to people teed-off at them, that are in possession of firearms. In some case those individuals are not the most outstanding citizens. Wardens generally do not have time for personal vendettas unless their target is a career poacher. Wardens spend more time on public land than private for the same reason we go to our favorite hotspot to hunt/fish.....that's where we find the most game.
The problem with laws is that they are often contradictory or murky.
But, the notion that a wildlife enforcement officer can't patrol private property is ridiculous. If that was the case there would be no point in having a game warden in this county or the next one up, there is no public land in it.
And tahunua, you are getting off in the weeds. Nobody is talking about randomly checking hunter's property to see what they have or raping or beating wives. A more fitting example would be following three poachers back to their motel room in Eden where they had three deer iced down in the tub, seriously. And no, they did not get a warrant.
But, the notion that a wildlife enforcement officer can't patrol private property is ridiculous. If that was the case there would be no point in having a game warden in this county or the next one up, there is no public land in it.
And tahunua, you are getting off in the weeds. Nobody is talking about randomly checking hunter's property to see what they have or raping or beating wives. A more fitting example would be following three poachers back to their motel room in Eden where they had three deer iced down in the tub, seriously. And no, they did not get a warrant.
tahunua001
New member
not it's not.
4th amendment of the constitution.
your property, any property, is protected from search or seizure, including land, meaning, if they don't have your explicit approval, they can not patrol it, period. this is also found in the final section of the 5th amendment,
although it mostly covers self incrimination and right to fair trial, the statement, "nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property", meaning your property is your property and you are free to treat it as you deem fit and if they means barring any law enforcement official who does not have a warrant, it means you can.
no we really aren't. you are basically stating that game wardens are free to do almost anything they want, where they want, and that it's always been that way. I was stating specific areas where "it's always been that way" does not constitute whether they actually have the legal, or social right to do it.
following a bunch of poachers to a hotel room in no way equals patrolling their happy selves through your alfalfa fields without your consent. now, if you see a group of guys climbing a fence next to a "no trespassing" sign then that may constitute probably cause in which case he may approach you and ask if you would allow him to investigate or he may follow if you've already supplied written permission, but unless it is part of an active investigation and he has probable cause, he can't just drive through your tractor access roads like he owns the place.
Last edited:
Tahunua, in your example of standing behind the 4th amendment you missed one very important thing. In the 4th amendment, you'll notice the word "unreasonable".
US court system has long held that warrantless searches of private property to enforce game regulations are reasonable.
US court system has long held that warrantless searches of private property to enforce game regulations are reasonable.
I'd like to read summarires of some of these cases. I'm surprised any US court has even heard any case concerning game regulations, but maybe you are considering poaching endangered species as game regulations. Anyways, can you possibly cite one or two of these cases so I can read up on them before commenting further?
Some on here seem to know more about it than the Supreme Court.
A good example would be a dove hunt. They routinely patrol with airplanes and if they see a congregation of vehicles and hunters around a field an entire group of officers will come in and check everybody there. I have been checked at least a dozen times over the years. And, they certainly don't have to ask anybody's permission and they will write up the landowner as well if he has broken any rules.
I would advise anybody to avoid taking legal advice about what they can and can't do on the internet. Your pocketbook probably won't like it if you use some of this advice thinking you can get away with something nefarious just because you are on private property and think they won't come after you just because you get your door shut.
A good example would be a dove hunt. They routinely patrol with airplanes and if they see a congregation of vehicles and hunters around a field an entire group of officers will come in and check everybody there. I have been checked at least a dozen times over the years. And, they certainly don't have to ask anybody's permission and they will write up the landowner as well if he has broken any rules.
I would advise anybody to avoid taking legal advice about what they can and can't do on the internet. Your pocketbook probably won't like it if you use some of this advice thinking you can get away with something nefarious just because you are on private property and think they won't come after you just because you get your door shut.
tahunua001
New member
nobody is advising anyone to break laws on private property because they can get away with it. is that really what you're taking away from all this? I'm saying you have a legal right to bar game wardens from your property if they do not possess probable cause. flying over with a plane and witnessing large groups of vehicles, in my opinion does not constitute probable cause, however if what you say is true and there is no public land, sure F&G has to police somewhere, so in such cases determination of probable cause is likely more lax.
however, have you ever seen a game warden simply drive through a cattle pasture or just start walking through a wheat field without any indication that someone may be hunting?
however, have you ever seen a game warden simply drive through a cattle pasture or just start walking through a wheat field without any indication that someone may be hunting?
TimSr, here you go:
http://blogs.findlaw.com/california...review-of-game-warden-warrantless-search.html
http://www.hastingsconlawquarterly.org/archives/V13/I1/OConnor.pdf
http://scholarship.law.umt.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2310&context=mlr
http://www.outdoornews.com/March-2009/Ruling-affirms-officers-enforcement-tool/
Enough, or should I keep going?
http://blogs.findlaw.com/california...review-of-game-warden-warrantless-search.html
http://www.hastingsconlawquarterly.org/archives/V13/I1/OConnor.pdf
http://scholarship.law.umt.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2310&context=mlr
http://www.outdoornews.com/March-2009/Ruling-affirms-officers-enforcement-tool/
Enough, or should I keep going?
Great links Doyle.
And tahunua, another thing they do regularly is stake out the beaver ponds over in the swamps in the upper Haw River during duck season. Always have. And, it is all private property, non navigable , with dozens if not more property owners. My cousin had one sneak up on him this year on his own property. He checked him, checked for bait, and continued up the drainage to the next hunters. And, he has every authority to do so. It is just the way it is.
And tahunua, another thing they do regularly is stake out the beaver ponds over in the swamps in the upper Haw River during duck season. Always have. And, it is all private property, non navigable , with dozens if not more property owners. My cousin had one sneak up on him this year on his own property. He checked him, checked for bait, and continued up the drainage to the next hunters. And, he has every authority to do so. It is just the way it is.
YARDDOG(1)
New member
They won't walk the woods here in FL,, Just wait you out ; )
Y/D
Y/D
reynolds357
New member
Tahuna, Hunting lands are considered open fields. The courts have ruled that there is no reasonable expectation of privacy in open fields. L.E. does not need a warrant to go into open fields. For a law enforcement officer to need a warrant to come onto your hunting land, you would have to have a fence that can not be seen through going completely around the property. The fence would have to be high enough that it can not be seen over without the aid of mechanical devices. If I can go up a high hill on your neighbors property and see over your fence, you have no expectation of privacy. In essence, if you had the type fence required to constitute a "reasonable expectation of privacy," it would be a high fence hunting preserve. DNR has its own set of regulations governing high fence hunting preserves.
Tahuna, L.E. does not need probable cause to come onto your hunting land.
What do I know about it? I only executed over 1100 search warrants in my drug investigation career. Never had one suppressed.
We would walk all up onto people's property hunting pot, meth labs, and moonshine stills. Did not have a warrant. Did not need a warrant. Did not need probable cause. Did not need anything but feet and 4 wheelers. Never once had an " open fields" warrantless search suppressed either.
Retrieving game is a different matter than going onto land. A game warden can go onto land looking for a wounded or dead animal if he wants to. When he finds it, he does not have the right to take it and give it to the person who shot it. If the owner of the property wants the animal and wants to tag it, the animal is theirs. If the owner does not want to tag it nor does he want the one who shot the animal to have it, DNR can take the animal to the food bank etc. where it will be used for the public good. The animal is the property of the State.
Tahuna, L.E. does not need probable cause to come onto your hunting land.
What do I know about it? I only executed over 1100 search warrants in my drug investigation career. Never had one suppressed.
We would walk all up onto people's property hunting pot, meth labs, and moonshine stills. Did not have a warrant. Did not need a warrant. Did not need probable cause. Did not need anything but feet and 4 wheelers. Never once had an " open fields" warrantless search suppressed either.
Retrieving game is a different matter than going onto land. A game warden can go onto land looking for a wounded or dead animal if he wants to. When he finds it, he does not have the right to take it and give it to the person who shot it. If the owner of the property wants the animal and wants to tag it, the animal is theirs. If the owner does not want to tag it nor does he want the one who shot the animal to have it, DNR can take the animal to the food bank etc. where it will be used for the public good. The animal is the property of the State.
Last edited:
buck460XVR
New member
While this may be true, why would you? If you are abiding by the law, the warden is on your side and an attribute to your land.
tahunua001
New member
one obvious reason would be disturbing crops. some wardens prefer wheelers to walking and if you're going where the people are, that means they might just go tearing up freshly planted fields or fields with delicate crops, ruining a portion of your harvest. other reasons are that some wardens, pic a spot they like and frequent it, just like hunters, and if people are constantly being accosted by the same warden having to take time out of their hunt to provide ID and permits, then odds are they'll decide to hunt somewhere else. last time I checked, most farmers don't enjoy deer, at least in my region. if nobody is hunting your land because of a rogue GW, then something should definitely be done.
then there are the rich people that seem to enjoy buying large stretches of land for the sole purpose of not letting anyone else on it...seems to be a practice that is increasing in popularity in my area as well....
... and then there are the guys that have whiskey stills, pot plots, and meth labs scattered through the woods, but I don't care about their reasoning. and for the most part, I do agree and if a farmer does have a problem with poachers tearing his fields up and leaving his gates open and all manner of things, sure, by all means any game warden would be your best friend and probably welcomed to dinner if he caught the perps, however, as a landowner, it should be within your purview to bar anyone, no matter the badge they wear, from their property.
EDIT: we all have the right to own guns, some people see no reason why you would ever need one and that is their prerogative, however that does not remove their right to own one. same can be said for any of the amendments in the bill of rights, some people never have a need to exorcise them, however it does not change the fact that they are entitled to them.