Open fields under fire in another state

[Hilljackoutlaw]

Louisiana the latest state to sue. We have had this happen on the family farm in PA before many years ago. It definitely makes ya feel violated even if the encounter is cordial.

Power vs. Privacy: Landowner Sues Game Wardens, Challenges Property Intrusion

Government officials claim power over entrance, searches, and surveillance on private land with no restrictions.

www.agweb.com

 

[ismith]

Think of it as a form of tax, like prima nocta.

 

[Mallardsx2]

It's likely just one or two power-tripping bunny cops causing the ruckus.

 

[duckhunt]

I have mixed feelings about this. But I do think if a game warden is checking someone on private property there is probably a very good reason why.

 

[VAspeedgoat]

A few years ago on opening day of dove season two game wardens came on our farm. They checked hunters twice and drove around our farm. They parked at every visible stand I assume checking for bait which required quite a bit of effort on their part. I was working and saw them coming out and started walking to the truck to see what was going on and they never even slowed down as they drove by me. Really pissed me off! But like they say, "if you have nothing to hide." But I do think some things are a matter of common courtesy.

I will say this on the article, I'd bet on their being a lot more to the story.

 

[antlerradar]

I have always told the wardens that they can come onto the property anytime they want.

 

[Dubz337]

Louisiana the latest state to sue. We have had this happen on the family farm in PA before many years ago. It definitely makes ya feel violated even if the encounter is cordial.

Power vs. Privacy: Landowner Sues Game Wardens, Challenges Property Intrusion

Government officials claim power over entrance, searches, and surveillance on private land with no restrictions.

www.agweb.com

I'm highly offended by this internet comment and will harshly judge who you are in real life based on it.

 

[VikingsGuy]

“If you ain’t guilty you got nothing to worry about” is the most BS statement I can think of. Can’t believe folks try it and others fall for it.

As for 4thA, I am a fan of a straightforward textual reading, but unimproved real property isn’t on the list. I am not a fan of “penumbras” and “spirit of the text” so I will be consistent in this case too (even though I don’t like the intrusion).

The real answer - as it always should be in these cases - take it to your legislature, don’t try to gin up the constitution (it has enough problems of its own). Hadn’t really thought about this much, but definitely will mention to my state legislature rep next time I see him.

 

[WildWill]

Open fields goes to far IMO! Hopefully this will be one more state to right the wrong.

 

[TOGIE]

when i worked for Division of Water Resources I had statutory authority to enter private lands without permission to inspect water structures of any type. i wasn't even a field employee or water comissioner, it simply applies to anyone who works for the agency. though i did exercise that authority multiple times, and only on one occasion did we go somewhere in our official capacities where i know the property owner did not want us, but that property owner was breaking the law and i was helping the water commissioners enforce an injunction.

that statutory authority is good for DWR given what it's charged with doing. but, i do get it, it is a scary concept in principle.

 

[Rzrbck918]

Open fields goes to far IMO! Hopefully this will be one more state to right the wrong.

I agree it goes too far but only in the instance it requires no probable cause or reasonable suspicion. I have no issue with a GW entering a property following hearing a shot in mid November or mid April but just entering property to see what he can see, too much.

 

[SFC B]

From the time I was an LEO, through my later investigative position, I will say something that may or may not be popular. EVERY SINGLE ONE OF US breaks the law. Period. No matter how minor or diminutive the infraction is or how often, we do. The idea of F&W folks having the able to lurk at will, with the mere hope they MIGHT find something to act on without review is offensive to property rights and the ability to exclude. While the "if you're doing nothing wrong" crowd sounds good, there is no way to adjust for the bad intentions, prejudices or personal dislike that those officials (just like everyone) carry with them. Judicial review is the safe guard against official abuse. if you don't care, feel free to give blanket permission.

 

[VikingsGuy]

From the time I was an LEO, through my later investigative position, I will say something that may or may not be popular. EVERY SINGLE ONE OF US breaks the law. Period. No matter how minor or diminutive the infraction is or how often, we do. The idea of F&W folks having the able to lurk at will, with the mere hope they MIGHT find something to act on without review is offensive to property rights and the ability to exclude. While the "if you're doing nothing wrong" crowd sounds good, there is no way to adjust for the bad intentions, prejudices or personal dislike that those officials (just like everyone) carry with them. Judicial review is the safe guard against official abuse. if you don't care, feel free to give blanket permission.

I agree with your general discomfort- but disagree that promoting made up text is a basis for judicial review. That is also horribly subject to the bad intentions, prejudices and personal agendas you correctly have concern about. There are right ways and wrong ways to secure our rights. Some cases call for the courts, some call for legislative solutions. Making up constitutionally standards is typically a poor approach in my opinion.

 

[SFC B]

I agree with your general discomfort- but disagree that promoting made up text is a basis for judicial review. That is also horribly subject to the bad intentions, prejudices and personal agendas you correctly have concern about. There are right ways and wrong ways to secure our rights. Some cases call for the courts, some call for legislative solutions. Making up constitutionally standards is typically a poor approach in my opinion.

I would agree that legislative restriction is the appropriate approach and this particular lawsuit is flawed. I believe states (voters) should restrict these F&W officials access to private property to AT LEAST reasonable suspicion, if not probable cause. Violating property rights "just because" should be offensive to any landowner in my opinion.

 

[WildWill]

I agree it goes too far but only in the instance it requires no probable cause or reasonable suspicion. I have no issue with a GW entering a property following hearing a shot in mid November or mid April but just entering property to see what he can see, too much.

Absolutely. I don't have a problem with a game warden coming on my property anytime. That being said I still believe open fields is far to over reaching.

 

[Sytes]

If States opt to increase the threshold on the 4th, more power to them - for their State employees.

Federally, SCOTUS ruling on 4th and the Open Field Doctrine is clear.

A State may (and IMO) should keep with the SCOTUS ruling. Though, to each State their own.

Federal officials are not bound to State rulings so long as it's within federal purview/jurisdiction.