One of Us
| Under many rulings on lawsuits brought into the Federal Courts regarding state rights about this question it has always been ruled that the individual state and citizens therein own and administer the rules regarding the animals within that state. The only exclusions are animals that are under USF&G oversight like waterfowl or game within a high fence that cannot escape and have been put within said high fence at the private landowner's expense. That's exactly why each state can set different fees and rules for NRs to the point where NRs aren't even allowed to hunt certain species or anything if they so desire. |
| | |
One of Us
| Are you asking what the laws are or we think they ought to be? |
| | |
One of Us
| There is an auto/deer collision case waiting to be heard in the courts of Missouri. The plaintiff is suing the state for damages as a result of hitting a free range deer that the state claims ownership of, but does nothing to restrict the movement of and protect the general public from. I’ve heard some internal rumblings that the state is considering changing the law on deer to be the property of the person on the land they reside. It seems all states universally want to claim wildlife as property of the state, until said wildlife causes property damage or physical injury to humans, then it’s not their problem. More of government wanting to have their cake and eat it too. Of coarse, the advantage is to the hunter by maintaining the status quo. Without state regulations and oversight most game animal species would plummet. I doubt anything will ever change, but it is interesting to ponder
All We Know Is All We Are
|
| | | Posts: 1225 | Location: E Central MO | Registered: 13 January 2014 | 
IP
|
|
One of Us
| In many states a landowner can hunt their own property without a license. The states started licenses, etc. to help build wildlife herds, and obtain land. I don't think a lot of states claim ownership of the wildlife, but regulate the seasons etc. to build the herds, etc. Many years ago here, I was one of 1200 people to get a deer here, that year. NOW we are encouraged to shoot up to 40 a year, with most of them being does. Indeed , in the county I live in, NO limit on does, if taken with a bow. Whoever said that without regulations and such, the wildlife numbers would plummet. In Maryland, it's well kmown more that a few farmers will shoot any deer the see. Like the Boers in south Africa did, and decimated the herds. I don't think most states claim ownership of the game, but the authority to regulate it's taking. |
| | | Posts: 501 | Location: Maryland | Registered: 18 June 2006 |
IP
|
|
One of Us
| I do not think anyone has the right to kill off a whole herd of native deer and transplant a new “better” herd from another state. But Texas let Ted Nugget do it.
That is not conservation.
I like the rule that game is held in common trust and only becomes yours once you physically possesses it. You may own the land, but you do not own the animals. We need to get back from game ownership. We are turning our game, mostly deer into glorified livestock.
The general rule is that game is held in common through the state and only becomes yours upon rendering it to your possession. This rule was articulated before game frams. It is still the general rule. |
| | | Posts: 12774 | Location: Somewhere above Tennessee and below Kentucky | Registered: 31 July 2016 |
IP
|
|
One of Us
| quote: Originally posted by larryshores:
Are you asking what the laws are or we think they ought to be?
What I am saying is that State DNRs ,FW&P or whatever the wildlife agency has over extended unlawfully,its original Constitutional intent & powers. I have only read my States Constitution.Check yours out. |
| | | Posts: 4372 | Location: NE Wisconsin | Registered: 31 March 2007 |
IP
|
|
one of us
| The right to hunt and fish is a different beast than how it is regulated/managed.
Read up on the Public Trust Doctrine before passing judgement in knee-jerk fashion. There are very overt reasons why things are the way they are in the U.S. that date back to the Magna Carta and well older. Whether you know it or not, the "power" you imply being weilded is the driving force behind the North American model for wildlife management. |
| | | Posts: 211 | Location: West of the Big Muddy | Registered: 15 March 2001 |
IP
|
|
One of Us
| Excellent post Kernel!!! |
| | |
One of Us
| Under US law, land may be privately owned, but the game belongs to the state. They have a right to regulate seasons and methods and number of game taken. Most except private preserves and non-native game. |
| | | Posts: 874 | Location: S. E. Arizona | Registered: 01 February 2019 |
IP
|
|
One of Us
| they regulate non native species seasons and bag limits too.
here the game animals belong to the citizens of the state.
no suing the state for running over one of their/your/our animals, you can however claim and retrieve that animal without a license,
unless it's on posted private property.
the irony is you can't hunt your deer on not your land pretty much making those deer private property if they can keep them there. |
| | | Posts: 5005 | Location: soda springs,id | Registered: 02 April 2008 |
IP
|
|
One of Us
| quote: Originally posted by Lamar:
the irony is you can't hunt your deer on not your land pretty much making those deer private property if they can keep them there.
You may not be able to access the private land the animal is on, but unless it's under high fence the animal can go off that land any time it wants to and that's why the state can regulate them. |
| | |
one of us
| quote: It seems all states universally want to claim wildlife as property of the state, until said wildlife causes property damage or physical injury to humans, then it’s not their problem. More of government wanting to have their cake and eat it too
Wisconsin does pay deer damage that is caused by there deer. Its called crop damage here. |
| | | Posts: 215 | Location: BRF mid west WI. | Registered: 28 February 2003 |
IP
|
|
One of Us
| I have a 700 acre place about 150 miles from my house. I spend an enormous amount of money up there for conservation. Burning, habitat modification, planting trees, protein, minerals, food plots, watering point, spin feeders and on and on and on.
I have to abide by the state laws. Quite honestly, I think I ought to be able to do whatever I want to do. I don't want to practice a scorched earth policy. After all, why would I spend all of this money and go to all of these efforts if I was going to do that? I hunted a single buck this year. I never fired a shot.
Sometimes things occur and I would like a little leeway. For example, I had an obviously very sick doe. I wanted too whack her and get rid of her. By the time I got permission, I never saw her again. When FWC saw the picture they wanted the brain. They were concerned about CWD. Never saw her again. |
| | |
One of Us
| The real world to some might be a whitetail buck living on 640 acres its whole life. But for many, the real world is a migrating herd of mule deer that moves over 150 miles. Or a herd of elk that moves 30 miles in a fall. Moose that travel freely- 10 miles in a night to look for love.
Flights of ducks and geese and doves that travel thousands of miles. Cougars that travel hundreds of miles. Fish that move miles upstream.
While some may be responsible if management was left up to them, most would abuse the resource (animals). They would take as the animals came thru. Larry could grow the deer and his neighbor would shoot them. Or high fence like many have in Texas. Problem is high fence does not work for migrating/moving species.
As was said previous google about the subject--
"Seven sisters of wildlife conservation"
And we own a ranch full of elk, deer, turkeys, cats and bears. I like my State being the shepherd for the herds. They give us some leeway to deal with problems. But there is no doubt that the only reason we have game is because the public can't do as they please.
.. |
| | | Posts: 789 | Location: Utah, USA | Registered: 14 January 2005 |
IP
|
|
One of Us
| quote: Originally posted by MC:
The real world to some might be a whitetail buck living on 640 acres its whole life. But for many, the real world is a migrating herd of mule deer that moves over 150 miles. Or a herd of elk that moves 30 miles in a fall. Moose that travel freely- 10 miles in a night to look for love.
Flights of ducks and geese and doves that travel thousands of miles. Cougars that travel hundreds of miles. Fish that move miles upstream.
While some may be responsible if management was left up to them, most would abuse the resource (animals). They would take as the animals came thru. Larry could grow the deer and his neighbor would shoot them. Or high fence like many have in Texas. Problem is high fence does not work for migrating/moving species.
As was said previous google about the subject--
"Seven sisters of wildlife conservation"
And we own a ranch full of elk, deer, turkeys, cats and bears. I like my State being the shepherd for the herds. They give us some leeway to deal with problems. But there is no doubt that the only reason we have game is because the public can't do as they please.
..
Exactly! I do not agree with a lot of what my state does, but I am grateful that they do not leave the management to landowners! |
| | |
