A few observations from SD

So they are essentially saying that we're on our own if we use the Hunting Atlas and field posted signs. I would love to see the written regulation that says all hunters must have a phone with the SD Hunting GPS maps to verify public hunting boundaries.

I expect though that if they went back and took it to court they would lose.

I was once ticketed in Kansas while pheasant hunting. My crime was "walking in a hunting like manner" after legal shooting hours. I went back two weeks later and had my court date. This incident occurred at sunset while I was walking back to the truck on a dirt road...which the warden admitted to the county attorney and judge...with my O/U broken open, unloaded and over my shoulder...which the warden admitted to the county attorney and judge...with my lab walking beside me at heel....which the warden admitted to the county attorney and judge. The warden dug out an obscure paragraph in the KS hunting regs that said if your dog was not on leash then you are hunting. Period. The judge looked at it and apologized to me and said she had no choice but to find me guilty as I admitted the dog was not on a leash. Then she and the county attorney tongue lashed the warden for, in 25 words or less, being a #^$!&* idiot. I still had to pay up though.

I smile about it now but I was a bit hot about it at the time.
 
Last edited:
I quoted the Sierra Club because they tend to be anti big oil and even they realize that ethanol is NOT green.
 
Wardens run about 50:50 being idiots vs. stand up good guys. I get it though, tough job and they can probably say the same thing about the hunters, poachers, and others that they run into on a daily basis

I tend to approach wardens head on face to face and challenge their actions if they seem unreasonable. I have done this since I was in my 20s and feel pretty confident because I run very clean. I have taught more than one warden how to ID early season ducks and the differences between pintails, gaddie, and wigeon. I have had wardens want me to empty my truck to look for "stuff" ... answer is have at it, but expectation is everything must be put back like it was found ... yet to have one search.


The incident above should have resulted in warnings.
 
Mn has enacted a law to protect creeks and rivers that run through farm property: buffer planting is required, 50' each side. Not certain about the footage, but the law was passed this past year. And there are fines.



Southern MN cities are having problems with polluted water supplies et al. The problem: how to enforce the statute.
 
jonnyB said:
Mn has enacted a law to protect creeks and rivers that run through farm property: buffer planting is required, 50' each side. Not certain about the footage, but the law was passed this past year. And there are fines.



Southern MN cities are having problems with polluted water supplies et al. The problem: how to enforce the statute.
Click to expand...

I have heard of Minnesota farmers putting up no trespassing signs on account of this law. Seen any evidence of that ?

Something about taking without compensation.
 
Chestle said:
So they are essentially saying that we're on our own if we use the Hunting Atlas and field posted signs. I would love to see the written regulation that says all hunters must have a phone with the SD Hunting GPS maps to verify public hunting boundaries.
Click to expand...

I have read the rule book front to back a few times, but it's been a few years. I do believe somewhere in there it does actually say something along the lines of, "it is the hunters responsibility to know all public land boundaries whether marked or not."
 
Have not heard about additional no trespass signs; not sure why that would be a result of the new law...

I read that the farmers are trying to get compensated for the mitigation area next to streams.
 
jonnyB said:
Have not heard about additional no trespass signs; not sure why that would be a result of the new law...

I read that the farmers are trying to get compensated for the mitigation area next to streams.
Click to expand...

From what I’ve heard they are upset Pheasants Forever was pushing for the law. Just talk for what’s its worth.
 
I was told that MN farmers are being paid for the 50' buffer area - making more than they were if was put in CRP.
 
So, in reference to the conservation officer who said everyone should have a GPS with them at all times when hunting in South Dakota. I do not see that in the regs book? How are you to know where the boundaries are if you cannot afford a GPS and the state does not place signs in proper places? If the farmer wanted people to not trespass he should put out a few signs if it is that confusing. I understand a farmer upset over people trespassing, but why not be a part of the solution instead of the problem. I think the officer should be the one to fix the situation instead of adding to the problem of peoples view of them and their profession. These types of stories are what cause people to have a not so favorable view of officers. I think I would spend the money to go to the court date. Someone has to be a voice of reason. Maybe there is more to the story from the farmers side but looking at it from my point of view I think everyone could have been served better with a much happier ending.
 
goldenboy said:
So, in reference to the conservation officer who said everyone should have a GPS with them at all times when hunting in South Dakota. I do not see that in the regs book? How are you to know where the boundaries are if you cannot afford a GPS and the state does not place signs in proper places? If the farmer wanted people to not trespass he should put out a few signs if it is that confusing. I understand a farmer upset over people trespassing, but why not be a part of the solution instead of the problem. I think the officer should be the one to fix the situation instead of adding to the problem of peoples view of them and their profession. These types of stories are what cause people to have a not so favorable view of officers. I think I would spend the money to go to the court date. Someone has to be a voice of reason. Maybe there is more to the story from the farmers side but looking at it from my point of view I think everyone could have been served better with a much happier ending.
Click to expand...

Trespass cases are solely driven by the landowner being trespassed upon in SD.
 
If it was a one time deal (trespass) than I guess live and learn. But SD has what 80K+ nonresident hunters ?? They need to be proactive in prevent issues where they have the opportunity to do so.

If this is a spot that has frequent trespass issues - than the state needs to improve boundary line identification to prevent future altercations or even possible escalation between private landowner and hunters (often not knowing the history of the area)


OR is this like a local / county speed trap with the CO and the county DA in cahoots to pad the counties income ??? Warden just parks on the hill and watches NR hunters each day cross the poorly defined boundary lines.
 
McFarmer said:
I have heard of Minnesota farmers putting up no trespassing signs on account of this law. Seen any evidence of that ?

Something about taking without compensation.
Click to expand...


No idea and hard to tell. MN agricultural zone is like SD. All land is off limits unless landowner grants permission.

The parts of MN that I pheasant hunt is good enough between Federal WPAs, state GMAs, and WIA areas that I have not had the need to knock on doors. If I lived closer to where I pheasant hunt, I would probably work to have a relationship with a few of the farmers in the area. Most of the farmers that have allowed access are people that I enjoy spending time with.
 
annual trip 2018 was 11-5 to 11-10. 3 trucks, all hunting ditches, 2 using pointers. harvested 34, 25, 18. my truck, 25 harvested should have had limit of 45. poor shooting. great dog work, great trip until the last day. had a resident following us and running up and down the road so we could not use our dogs. we just walked the last 1.5 hours. will not be the case next year. we will get warden out there and find out what the hunter harassment fine is:cheers: we dump about $4500 into the local economy, and deserve better. we do not cross the fence or break the law. bird numbers were not up 47% where we hunted. but like our host said, if you only have 100 to start with, 47% increase is not that much. see you next year
 
With the irregular boundaries on a lot of the CREP parcels & frequent situations with poor signage citations could probably get written frequently. Probably good for a lot of us that most land owners & officers show some restraint in this area.......
 
benellibygolly said:
annual trip 2018 was 11-5 to 11-10. 3 trucks, all hunting ditches, 2 using pointers. harvested 34, 25, 18. my truck, 25 harvested should have had limit of 45. poor shooting. great dog work, great trip until the last day. had a resident following us and running up and down the road so we could not use our dogs. we just walked the last 1.5 hours. will not be the case next year. we will get warden out there and find out what the hunter harassment fine is:cheers: we dump about $4500 into the local economy, and deserve better. we do not cross the fence or break the law. bird numbers were not up 47% where we hunted. but like our host said, if you only have 100 to start with, 47% increase is not that much. see you next year
Click to expand...

just a personal observation....my own, but if you are continuously pounding ditches and shooting that much, sooner or later you are going to draw some unwanted attention....it's almost rude, but entirely legal to do this type of hunting, BUT if this is done mile after mile, it will simply get you a poor review....as a NR hunter myself, it seems offensive even to me....why not take your group and push a WI or WPA and let the dogs work safely? 2 pointers running both sides of the road with gunners, 3 trucks........guys on the road or in the ditch........man i am sorry, but this seems a bit of a 3 ring circus....overkill in a lot of ways...very offensive....just not the kind of image you want to project? common sense?
 
Last edited:
hunter94 said:
just a personal observation....my own, but if you are continuously pounding ditches and shooting that much, sooner or later you are going to draw some unwanted attention....it's almost rude, but entirely legal to do this type of hunting, BUT if this is done mile after mile, it will simply get you a poor review....as a NR hunter myself, it seems offensive even to me....why not take your group and push a WI or WPA and let the dogs work safely? 2 pointers running both sides of the road with gunners, 3 trucks........guys on the road or in the ditch........man i am sorry, but this seems a bit of a 3 ring circus....overkill in a lot of ways...very offensive....just not the kind of image you want to project? common sense?
Click to expand...

Gonna let benellibygolly handle most of this (if he even cares). But most of you guys know me well enough to expect some sort of response. I'll bite.

I agree that you're bound to attract some unwanted attention.....but I'm guessing they were split up: 1 truck, 2-3 guys, 1 dog, probably out in the middle of BFE. Rude?? Offensive?? How so??
 
It’s not offensive to hunt the ditches, to me it seems like another opportunity that SD had the common sense to make it legal. A couple public pieces I have hit the private landowner posted the boundaries on his adjacent property. Seems like a good way to deal with the issue, anyone crossing onto the land would be commuting a malicious act. And you can get a pack of 50 posted signs from tractor supply for 10 bucks. No need to call a warden, no fines, and the boundary easily identifiable. I have a gps but I don’t always take it. I’ve got enough to deal with my ecollar controller. I’m sure in the future e-collars will blue tooth to a phone app and the gps already does. Back to nature with my IPhone the whole reason I’m out there is to get away from the computer crazed world.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top