New rules for pa.

[Wyoming270]

Where's the equality and justice in this? We shouldn't abandon principles because they are messy.

I never said to abandon principles. i was explaining to you how government inefociency and ine

I definitely do not think the government is the answer to everything. I think people being decent humans is, but unfortunately that isn't reality.

Yes he was caught doing things on public do you think his behavior will change when he is unobservable on large private parcels? But you missed why I brought that example up. He's a wealthy individual caught violating game laws which you said doesn't happen.

Sounds like you think he has gotten away with alot over the decades. Might be something to that ...

 

[IDiot]

Sounds like you think he has gotten away with alot over the decades. Might be something to that ...

Catching poachers is already incredibly difficult. Violators are rarely caught during their first incident. I don't know but it stands to reason.

 

[Bonasababy]

Im not for anyone violating hunting regulations. While it seems you are convinced this guy is only buying land to poach, the legal system doesnt work that way.

While i dont advocate anyone illegally taking game, if someone is that serious about having good animals to poach that they are buying thousands of acres of elk habitat, they are probably going to maintain that habitat in a way that benefits the local public land hunting considerably more than a new data center, shooting sports complex, or campground. im not supporting this happening with that statement. But from the perspective of a wildlife management agency that is or is not paid off and is on a tight budget, spending time and effort catching guy who takes a few big ones a year but contributed to overall herd growth probably is not their biggest worry until local people cause enough of a stir to make them worry about their image.

So lets take a guy who is not wealthy but is able to scrape up enough to buy a nice piece of hunting land, put money and work into improving the habitat there, but does not live on the land...in PA.

As it stands now, a poacher can scope places like that out, and poach away, knowing no CO or warden can enter the land.

The open fields doctrine does NOT eliminate the need for probable cause.

 

[Wyoming270]

So lets take a guy who is not wealthy but is able to scrape up enough to buy a nice piece of hunting land, put money and work into improving the habitat there, but does not live on the land...in PA.

As it stands now, a poacher can scope places like that out, and poach away, knowing no CO or warden can enter the land.

The open fields doctrine does NOT eliminate the need for probable cause.

Why would the game warden not call the land owner to inform him someone is poaching on his land?

 

[Wyoming270]

Catching poachers is already incredibly difficult. Violators are rarely caught during their first incident. I don't know but it stands to reason.

So you think game wardens should just walk around private land spying on people until they decide they must be poaching?

 

[IDiot]

So you think game wardens should just walk around private land spying on people until they decide they must be poaching?

No surveillance "spying" should accompany a warrant which it almost always does. Have there been instances where it was taken too far, sure. Throw the case out if its found LE is violating the 4th amendment. But I don't believe in throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Handle things case by case.

Do I think a warden should be required wait for a warrant to investigate gunshots outside of legal seasons and shooting hours, no.

 

[SFC B]

You seem absolutist, that's a fine opinion. My opinion is a bit more nuanced. I wouldn't argue the legality of aerial surveillance by any method, but I'd prefer a warden interacting with people to check for violations.

There is a difference between your home and open land. You can disagree with that, the Supreme Court says there is a difference. You can say that's hypocritical, I'd say the world is complex.

I don't see how any crime anywhere comes into it. This is specifically about theft of a shared resource on land that is not shared. It makes things complicated no doubt. The question remains. How do you protect that public resource?

You're right about not siding with a criminal, I'll admit that outlook is short sighted.

An absolutist would find COMPLETE sovereignty on private land, I simply want the constitution to be followed and for the safeguard of judicial review to be applied as intended BEFORE allowing access on whims. There are many laws in place to combat poaching....FFS, there are basically no consequences applied to any of them. The more appropriate approach would be greatly increase penalties and bring the hammer down, send people to prison. The value of ANY game animal is within felony levels of theft in all jurisdictions.

 

[SFC B]

So lets take a guy who is not wealthy but is able to scrape up enough to buy a nice piece of hunting land, put money and work into improving the habitat there, but does not live on the land...in PA.

As it stands now, a poacher can scope places like that out, and poach away, knowing no CO or warden can enter the land.

The open fields doctrine does NOT eliminate the need for probable cause.

While Open Fields does not eliminate the NEED for probable cause, it ABSOLUTELY does ignore that need as it allows for trespass. In the situation you describe I believe a simple call and gaining PERMISSION would accomplish access. You (or anyone) is always free to grant access to anyone you WANT on your land.

 

[SFC B]

No surveillance "spying" should accompany a warrant which it almost always does. Have there been instances where it was taken too far, sure. Throw the case out if its found LE is violating the 4th amendment. But I don't believe in throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Handle things case by case.

Do I think a warden should be required wait for a warrant to investigate gunshots outside of legal seasons and shooting hours, no.

Firing a gun on private land has zero nexus to poaching outside other information....I shoot on private land much MORE during non hunting season periods (as do many) and in NO way should be any type of invitation for access. As for your first paragraph, why would you want to wait for probable violations instead of using the provide review process PRIOR to search? What would you propose the remedy be for those wronged? Investigations are necessarily, always handle "case by case" in every legal proceeding of any sort.