ADVERTISEMENT

OT: Hunters and landowners of interest

This is very interesting on many levels. Did game and fish suspect abuse ? If so they certainly shouldhave had a warrant. To go onto private property in camo without a warrant is not defensible . Is there abuse of hunting laws going on ?
 
This is very interesting on many levels. Did game and fish suspect abuse ? If so they certainly shouldhave had a warrant. To go onto private property in camo without a warrant is not defensible . Is there abuse of hunting laws going on ?
They had some minor violations as outlined in another article. There is no abuse of laws going on that I have heard and these clubs have not had problems since I hunted that area for 30+ years. My understanding from talking to others is that this is one warden with a major bug up his butt. I think we’re talking 7700 acres for these two properties combined with probably 100 hunters so you could always find something I suppose.
 
I have no clue in this case, but illegal baiting happens frequently on private property and this may be the only effective way to catch them. And on another note, it seems almost all private property is posted now and it is difficult for the average guy to find places to hunt. That is the main cause in the decline of hunter numbers and as hunter numbers fall, so does political clout.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ski
And on another note, it seems almost all private property is posted now and it is difficult for the average guy to find places to hunt. That is the main cause in the decline of hunter numbers and as hunter numbers fall, so does political clout.

Maybe if many hunters and non hunters had some respect for the folks who own private land posting would not be such an issue. Maybe if the average guy would ask permission of the landowner who pays the taxes and maintains the property permission would be granted.

There are many factors effecting hunter numbers and the main cause is not the posting of private property. There are thousands of acres of public land in northern pa that are not hunted.
 
"4th of July weekend" Its amazing how our government run court systems interpret the Constitution to their advantage. Everything else is Unconstitutional except intrusion onto private land. Some of these Wardens are totally out of control.
 
Article in OP says this has been approved by the Pa Supreme Court in 2007. This group is fighting to have that ruling overturned. But doesn’t say how they intend to do so. Once a case is ruled on by the Pa Supreme Court it would require a novel approach to have it heard again. No explanation of how they are going to have their issues heard.

One option would be to go to federal courts and fight these activities as violations of the US Constitution. Due process is paramount as is right of privacy.

Is an interesting issue. Do the owners of a large tract of land have privacy rights on that land? Does entering that land without permission by law enforcement require a search warrant? If one owns a thousand acres, they could easily engage in illegal activity....say poaching deer.... and be very hard to catch. Even getting enough evidence to secure a warrant would be difficult.

Seems in this case the warden has crossed the line into harassment. If he had occasionally entered the land it would likely have not become an issue. But now it will be a test case that may affect all landowners along with law enforcement.
 
  • Like
Reactions: psualt
"4th of July weekend" Its amazing how our government run court systems interpret the Constitution to their advantage. Everything else is Unconstitutional except intrusion onto private land. Some of these Wardens are totally out of control.
These wardens who abuse their authority and act like dictators should be made to feel like outcasts and pariahs in the towns in which they live.

Period.

Shunning is a perfect way to deal with it - shun the warden. Shun the warden's kids. Shun the warden's wife.
 
Last edited:
These wardens should be made to feel like outcasts and pariahs in the towns in which they live.

Period.

Shunning is a perfect way to deal with it - shun the warden. Shun the warden's kids. Shun the warden's wife.
Think before you type please ...........

On another note : Should hunting preserves have some sort of monitoring to mitigate illegal activities? Or should owners be allowed to do whatever they want ? Again, an interesting question.
 
Think before you type please ...........

On another note : Should hunting preserves have some sort of monitoring to mitigate illegal activities? Or should owners be allowed to do whatever they want ? Again, an interesting question.
Think of what law enforcement must have, "probable cause." If a policer officer comes on your property even with probable cause, you can tell him/her to get off if they do not have a warrant. I've known these wardens to come onto private property the first day of firearms season and get hunters out of their stand at 7:00AM just to check their licenses and firearms for no reason at all. My friend had a female warden point her firearm at his when he was in his stand.
 
Think before you type please ...........

On another note : Should hunting preserves have some sort of monitoring to mitigate illegal activities? Or should owners be allowed to do whatever they want ? Again, an interesting question.
Yes, OK.

Lots of good game wardens, but those who act as little dictators should be shunned.
 
Yes, OK.

Lots of good game wardens, but those who act as little dictators should be shunned.
I'm certainly guilty of typing some garbage here. Just pointing out ; no we are not going to advocate shunning a game wardens daughter
 
Maybe if many hunters and non hunters had some respect for the folks who own private land posting would not be such an issue. Maybe if the average guy would ask permission of the landowner who pays the taxes and maintains the property permission would be granted.

There are many factors effecting hunter numbers and the main cause is not the posting of private property. There are thousands of acres of public land in northern pa that are not hunted.
I can't speak for everywhere, but the ANF is heavily hunted and the vast majority of hunters are good guys who don't cause problems for landowners. My impression is that most posted land is to provide private hunting for the landowner, his family and friends.
 
Yes, OK.

Lots of good game wardens, but those who act as little dictators should be shunned.
I can't speak for everywhere, but the ANF is heavily hunted and the vast majority of hunters are good guys who don't cause problems for landowners. My impression is that most posted land is to provide private hunting for the landowner, his family and friends.
Much of the large tracts are now leased out to hunting clubs, families and friends, or wealthy people.
 
what if game warden flew a drone over the property?
I don't know, fellow citizen.

Do you want that?

Should the citizens get what they want, within the bounds of "tyranny of the majority" (meaning we shouldn't be able to vote to go grab Elon Musk, take his money and house).

Do you want drones flying over the streets of the suburbs and cities?

I do not.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ski and psualt
Do we want that?

It SHOULD be up to us.

The government was established for the people. We do not exist for the government.

Anyone working in the government exists FOR us.
Just the messenger......

 
Think of what law enforcement must have, "probable cause." If a policer officer comes on your property even with probable cause, you can tell him/her to get off if they do not have a warrant. I've known these wardens to come onto private property the first day of firearms season and get hunters out of their stand at 7:00AM just to check their licenses and firearms for no reason at all. My friend had a female warden point her firearm at his when he was in his stand.
My nephew works for PennDoT and just had a coworker have a very unpleasant experience with an overzealous DGW during this years deer season.

The guy is traveling down Fallbrook Rd., in Tioga county and sees an unmarked pickup truck in the center of the road. The driver puts his hand out the window and signals the guy to go around him, so he thought. When the driver goes to drive around the truck, the truck moves to cut him off and runs him into a pretty deep ditch. Both drivers jump out of their vehicles and the now announced Deputy GW tells the guy he was signaling for him to pull over.

The guy in the ditch is super P O'd now. He's wondering why the Deputy GW didn't get out of his unmarked vehicle and announce who he was and give instructions of what he was wanting this guy to do? The DGW said he wanted to check the guys Hunting License, weapon etc. . This guy wasn't hunting he was driving in his own vehicle and forced off the road. The DGW tells the guy, he'll help pull him out of the ditch and the guy tells him it would be better if he just left and he'd get out on his own.

That kind of stuff should not happen! Some guys have the little man syndrome and when they get the power they take it way too far, such as the OP's story.
 
I can't speak for everywhere, but the ANF is heavily hunted and the vast majority of hunters are good guys who don't cause problems for landowners. My impression is that most posted land is to provide private hunting for the landowner, his family and friends.
I own property ajacent to state forest lands (that away from roads and camps is very lightly hunted) and still have had issues with trespassing.
 
I own property ajacent to state forest lands (that away from roads and camps is very lightly hunted) and still have had issues with trespassing.
The biggest issue is a holes on quads. Somehow, they seem to think buying a quad is a license to ride where ever they want. There are good quad owners but too many are like feral hogs in the wild.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ski and GSPMax
what if game warden flew a drone over the property?
let me try and clarify. The article linked seems like a clear violation of the 4th amendment. That no law enforcement should be able to come on your property and surveil you with out cause and warrant. But there is the "plain sight" exception, police officer sees (fill in blank here) bag of weed on your front seat, joint in ash tray, firearm on front seat of you car, looks in window of your house and sees a MJ grow or meth lab and. he can come in. As its in plain sight. But this is a 1000s acre tract and he clearly cannot see in from the edges, so should not be there. But it would all be "plain sight " from a drone flying over head. What are the 4th amendment issues with that?
 
  • Like
Reactions: PSUEngineer89
let me try and clarify. The article linked seems like a clear violation of the 4th amendment. That no law enforcement should be able to come on your property and surveil you with out cause and warrant. But there is the "plain sight" exception, police officer sees (fill in blank here) bag of weed on your front seat, joint in ash tray, firearm on front seat of you car, looks in window of your house and sees a MJ grow or meth lab and. he can come in. As its in plain sight. But this is a 1000s acre tract and he clearly cannot see in from the edges, so should not be there. But it would all be "plain sight " from a drone flying over head. What are the 4th amendment issues with that?
Maybe they were in a helicopter. Happens.
 
let me try and clarify. The article linked seems like a clear violation of the 4th amendment. That no law enforcement should be able to come on your property and surveil you with out cause and warrant. But there is the "plain sight" exception, police officer sees (fill in blank here) bag of weed on your front seat, joint in ash tray, firearm on front seat of you car, looks in window of your house and sees a MJ grow or meth lab and. he can come in. As its in plain sight. But this is a 1000s acre tract and he clearly cannot see in from the edges, so should not be there. But it would all be "plain sight " from a drone flying over head. What are the 4th amendment issues with that?
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

That clause reads independent of the means of searching when it refers to "unreasonable searches and seizures".

So, whether it is done by high powered magnifying lens, aerial surveillance, or any other detection means, without reasonable suspicion, the search is forbidden.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GregInPitt
Sneaking around on hunted land sounds like a great way to get your ass shot off.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT