PLEASE USE YOUR FULL NAME OR THE POST WILL BE DELETED. INAPPROPRIATE LANGUAGE WILL GET YOU BANNED. PLEASE BE CONSCIOUS THAT THESE ARE PUBLIC POSTS. PLEASE BE CONSIDERATE OF CHILDREN THAT MAY BE SIGNED ON.
Ok, they finally posted the new bill and I see it's on the calendar for a vote tomorrow. Granted some things are better, but there are still a couple serious issues in my mind:
1) There is NO guaranteed right to retrieve in this bill. At least in the other bill, you had the right to WALK no matter what. This bill doesn't even mention retrieval of dogs.
2) While they took out the provisions with unposted land, we will STILL have to have a stack of permission forms on our person (not in our truck, but on our person as I read the thing) for all posted land we are on. The landowner's word is still not good enough.
3) This bill REMOVES the exemption for the two counties that makes it so that landowner consent is required to prosecute. With this, they can prosecute anyone statewide regardless of the wishes of the owner. To me, that's a step backwards for an act entitled "AN ACT TO PROTECT LANDOWNER RIGHTS."
4) Silly question, but if I have written permission for myself to go on land and take my daughter with me, does SHE have to have written permission also? How about if someone is a guest at a hunt club for the day? They don't have a membership card to show. What will they need?
5) This may seem silly, but as this act is written, if I allow my hunt club to post my land and the game warden comes along and I don't have a copy of that written permission AND considering they don't need my permission to prosecute, TECHNICALLY I could be prosecuted for not having written permission to hunt my own land. I know it makes no sense and is a little far-fetched, but considering out in the woods, I have no way to prove it's MY land if it's posted by the hunt club instead of me, will the officer take my word for it?
6) Lastly, it makes NO sense to me that if I post my land for hunting, that I still have to give written permission to someone to gather pinestraw on my land. If I'm at church and a friend asks if he can get some, I shouldn't have to go looking for a piece of paper and a pen. It's MY land. Why can't I verbally tell them to go ahead???
Just my observations. Anyone else looked at it and have any thoughts?
-Ken
I will try to answer some of your questions as they were passed to us.
1. There is no guarranteed rite to retrieve now on posted land as the law reads today.
2. Yes you have to have written permission on posted land on your persons. However, if your hunt club leases the land they will give you the permission slip.
3. Nothing has changed as the law reads today on posted land except now a game warden can give you a ticket for not having the written permission.
4. If your daughter is hunting under your hunting liscense no your permission is good enough. They also said you can get written permission with guest on the slip.
5. I dont think you will have that problem but I may be wrong.
6. I understand your thoughts on the pine straw issue some where between the cracks it was slipped in, probally from someone that wants to stop people from getting pinestraw off the land by stealing it???
This bill only makes you have to have written permission on posted land and a game warden can now enforce it with other law enforcement officials. and the pine staw deal.... We asked to be able to get verbal permission to retrieve your dog and they wont in favor of this deal but we didn't push so hard because it is much better than the proposed bill. We just hope they don't try anything before the bill reaches the Governor.
If I remember correctly the right to retrieve in the compromise was only on UN POSTED land..I am pretty sure the posted land retrival died the first day it was talked about...Where it is at now?,,,Well land is Not Posted....
If they had asked me I would have gave them the posted land permission and Game Warden writing tickets any way. That is common sense and I cannot beleive they had not had it( And I hunt in a county where this will change)
But I THINK the written permission thing will tell Law officers who has a right to be there so fewer tickets are written incorrectly and less court cases where law enforcement is found in the wrong. Again this is what I think and have nothing to back it up.
As for the purple paint deal, I think this is just plain stupid..When a sign cost a quarter and the owners name and contact info should be on it for the Law enforcment guys and hunters to contact,,,Also only a land owner should be able to put up purple paint NOT A LESSEE,,,,They may not lease it but one year and then it becomes open,,,Alot of confusion in my opinion waiting to happen..
But at least they are not going to inpound a vehicle if the tires are parked off the right of way of road in the wrong place. Anyway my two cents, I may be screaming bloody murder if they figure a way to abuse this later,,,And I guess some guys are going to have to lease some land as a anchor point so to speak that have never had to join a club or lease any land at all in the past..But maybe not.
Ken, I have been going to Raleigh for 3 or 4 weeks now fighting these issue's along with several other people that cares alot about our sport. If you had to listen to all the negative situations that has happened because of hunters, you may understand that the HB 762 is a great thing. Last week if SB 374 would have went through you would have had some issues! There is one thing for sure, they ain't making anymore land and to hunt we must be able to go this land. Unposted land will soon be extinct as well as the kind land owners that lets us hunt. We must work with the land owners to ensure when your daughter and my daughter has some grand children for us we will still be able to enjoy our hounds with them. We (hunters) have a responsibility to fight for our rights to be able to hunt and every year we are going to be faced with issues, I just hope and pray they don't get no worst than this 762 bill. Last week the SB 374 bill had a retieval clause on it but it was on UNposted land and it was on foot only. No retrieval on posted land unless you had written permission and the way it read you couldn't stop on the road and pick your hound up unless you had written permission from land abutting to the highway. They said they were not going to enforce that way but who know's how each officer was going enforce it. Good luck with your letters to vote "no"!
Rod,
Ken, I agree if you are a land owner should have the right to say who can go on your land. I also think you should have the right to post your land and have someone to patrol it for intruders and be able to prosecute them. There are land owners that has their land posted and people still go on it and may even damage property because it is posted (still hunters vs dog hunters) so to speak, any way you look at it is bad for one good for another. I'm just glad this is all (so far) we are going to get out of it , for a dog hunters prospective.