House Bill 2089- Retrieval of Hunting Dog

[onpoint]

I have never seen more possessive land owners in my life then in the west/plains. My dad hunted in Wyoming in the late 60s and a wounded doe run onto the neighbors property only a few 100 feet. Then fell dead. The guide told my dad to leave it lay. They would not cross the fence. It's still alive and well today. I'm constantly reminded of this every fall that I hunt with friends from these areas. We are not use to that here in the upper midwest. Most land owners are easy to deal with. Just ask to follow a blood trail and nearly always you will be allowed to go after the animal. Same for your dog.

Maybe some lessons on what's just proper and right are in order.

 

[2dogsandagun]

I agree, whats mine is mine and yours is yours. My dog, your land. If I could move the land out from under my dog I would.

 

[Spence]

As a matter of fact I have. I spend between $10K and $20K a year on habitat and I do not outfit or charge trespass fees. People look to get on my land anyway they can. The 'wanton waste' law has been used for years to gain access to my land both for big game and upland game.

The bill, as written, lets a dog owner with valid hunting or furharvesting license have more rights to my private posted property than I do. Under this bill the dog owner & dog trumps my landownership and quiet enjoyment of same. The bill would open up to potential trespass abuses similar to what I have experienced with 'wanton waste'.

Very few things get me fired up, but this issue does. I believe what is mine is mine and what is yours is yours and I respect that and hope that others will do the same.

Why be opposed to this.... If the bill doesn't pass, and people obey the no tresspassing law, you have dogs running around on your land and by the law the owner shouldn't be able to come on, so his dog is just running around aimlessly on your land.

If the law passes, they can go get their dog and get off. Seems to kinda shorten the time they are on your land.

 

[Peterson]

So do I understand that the fact that you have a problem that your dog is on land posted land where you have no permission is now the problem of the landowner?

Do I also understand that deer hunting and a deerhunting landowner is beneath the level of a birdhunter and birddog? Just wondering?

1) I was quite clear.
I do not want my dog on posted land but I have lived long enough that I understand that Life throws one curves now and again, in and out of the field...my setter following scent onto posted property is not a situation that I encourage and is one for which I would retrieve, gunless, said birddog.
If by your line "now the problem of the landowner" subtly implies that said birddog may be shot by a landowner then I expect that a landowner taking that cowardly approach to a breach of trespass would find Karma continually visiting him....as long as I live and breathe.

2) No, a Birdhunter is not above a deer hunter or deer hunting landowner.
Yes, a Birddog is above a deer and deerhunting....every...single...time!

I also expect that it may not always be the landowner fretting over a straying birddog...often would be the lease holder.

Deer are indeed big business today and money expended along with the need for bragging rights down at the barbershop drives many folks to patrol fencelines, set traps, or doing anything necessary to gird their property's loins.
Common sense and reasonably viewing the actual damage from a birddog's straying foot seldom can pierce the "it's mine, dammit" attitude all too often so sadly prevalent today.
Again, to be clear, I don't want my birddog on your, or anyone's, property that is posted.... and I also do not want to deal with a landowner/leaseholder that values a birddog so minimally that the ultimate, irreversible, reaction to a foot placed wrong is taken.
But, deal with it I would.

I also expect that the landowners may hold enough sway with politicos that this bill may die.
Seems a waste of legislative time, either way.

 

[Shadow]

peterson- quite simple actually- if you are hunting you must know the boundaries- if you want to push it and hunt close to land that doesn't allow it- you, freinds, dogs, dogs of freinds- then keep away from edges/keep a reasonable distance- so you won't be tempted or in a situation where one goes on posted property- same as in your bird dog- you're responsibility is to have control of your dog- if it's where it shouldn't be it's your responsibilty-

and- as has always been the case- if your dog does go on posted property- you trespass/violate the law if you follow- a simple phone call to a local law enforcement agency where you state the issue most always results in you being able to go get your dog- you could treaspsss knowing you might win in court- because you did the right thing by calling and stating the facts- and everyone has cell phones- so-------

I have posted land- you step foot on it- you are breaking the law- seems quite plain and understandable

course- you said you'll take your chances and if court if need be-

 

[GSP]

I guess I just don't have an appreciation for what kind of a problem this is in KS. Maybe I'm missing something.

Here in MI, we have the law (you can retrieve your dog without firearm. You CAN NOT retrieve or trail wounded game) and it works. Maybe it is because the farms are so much smaller here and there are more property owners? I don't know?

I never stepped foot on private land without permission in KS. That said, I can certainly see situations where my dog might have. He runs big. If a WIHA property butts up to a non WIHA property, I guess I just shouldn't hunt it. Even if I stay 300 yards away from the line, it is entirely possible that my dog would range beyond that. I will plan future hunts accordingly.

I guess I can see both sides of this issue. That said, I still come down on the side of allowing someone to collect their dog. And yes, I am a land owner.

 

[Jester]

I'm on both sides of this. but stuff happens and dogs cross lines thats never going to change. this needs to be reworded to be more strict but trespass here in Ks is becoming a very big problem and as worded now i see where this will only aid in the law bakers. all that being said i will and have crossed to pick up dogs gunless

 

[Peterson]

peterson- quite simple actually- if you are hunting you must know the boundaries- if you want to push it and hunt close to land that doesn't allow it- you, freinds, dogs, dogs of freinds- then keep away from edges/keep a reasonable distance- so you won't be tempted or in a situation where one goes on posted property- same as in your bird dog- you're responsibility is to have control of your dog- if it's where it shouldn't be it's your responsibilty-

and- as has always been the case- if your dog does go on posted property- you trespass/violate the law if you follow- a simple phone call to a local law enforcement agency where you state the issue most always results in you being able to go get your dog- you could treaspsss knowing you might win in court- because you did the right thing by calling and stating the facts- and everyone has cell phones- so-------

I have posted land- you step foot on it- you are breaking the law- seems quite plain and understandable

course- you said you'll take your chances and if court if need be-

It is indeed simple.
I walk a piece of ground subtly pushing pheasants ahead untill a fence may halt them, or a change of cover, or a sign halts me, or...the dog mindful of scent takes a step upon posted ground.
When I see him do so, I gather him up.
That one foot or 100 yards or whatever is legally, illegal.
If alarms go off or if black heliocopter circle to protect "MINE", then so be it.
What a world this world has become.

You speak of "tempted" ....get your facts straight...I am not ever tempted to trespass. The dog may be by scent but, I, am not.
Watch who you indict incorrectly as to attitude and intent.

I found no cell phone coverage in parts of Western Kansas and areas of the U.P.
Perhaps I need better service.

This whole issue is far more concentrated in Ohio...on far smaller properties than in Kansas.
I will be happy to let Karma deal with actions taken in both areas.
I have come to appraise all hunters as...far different, to be polite.

And also, this has all been in mention of a dog hunting...sadly dogs can become lost and trespass.
In Ohio, the shoot, shovel and shut-up crowd care little about determing facts in a situation..."it's all about my deer, dammit!"
A sad world, indeed.

 

[Nick]

I'm on both sides of this. but stuff happens and dogs cross lines thats never going to change. this needs to be reworded to be more strict but trespass here in Ks is becoming a very big problem and as worded now i see where this will only aid in the law bakers. all that being said i will and have crossed to pick up dogs gunless

I am also on both sides of this. I totally understand MR Byrd and the other landowner's position on the trespassing issue. On the other hand, I don't think GSP (as he stated above) or anyone else should have to avoid hunting WIHA because it butts up to private ground.

I'm also a little torn on the wounded game issue. We hunt very hard to find every bird we shoot. I've even been with people who didn't spend much time looking for a wounded bird. I've taken my dog back to the area and continued to look while they keep walking. This year we had a situation where bird flushed at the end of the field. My dad shot it. The bird sailed across the road and dropped stone dead about 150 yards out in the field across the road. My dad had the bird marked (my old lab didn't see it). I put my gun and dog in the truck and walked to the bird (with hand signals from my dad). Yeah, I'm a good retriever. Picked up the bird and walked right back to the truck. Right or wrong? I guess after reading this thread I'm not sure.

 

[KsHusker]

This year we had a situation where bird flushed at the end of the field. My dad shot it. The bird sailed across the road and dropped stone dead about 150 yards out in the field across the road. My dad had the bird marked (my old lab didn't see it). I put my gun and dog in the truck and walked to the bird (with hand signals from my dad). Yeah, I'm a good retriever. Picked up the bird and walked right back to the truck. Right or wrong? I guess after reading this thread I'm not sure.

I believe in common sense. You're not hurting anything by grabbing a bird. Anyone that would chew you out for doing so has a stick up their ass, landowner, farmer, rancher taxpayer or not.

If the farmer truly wants no one on their land stop taking govt subsidies, dare I go off topic and ruffle some feathers Im not advocating trespassing by any means, but I think a valid point could be made there.

Back on topic...I still believe common sense could and should rule the day. You dont see people calling the cops or threatening the neighbor kid with a gun for retrieving the ball that went over the fence into your yard.

Seems dumb a law would even need to be made about this and that we are even debating it. Just my .02

People are too easily offended and get their feathers ruffled to easily. Also too many people abuse the sytem, but those people have been around since the dawn of time, law or no law. We all know whats right and wrong, we dont need the govt to tell us how to run our everyday lives. Theres a point where too much is toooo much. I think this would be an example of that.

I had a kid chew me out this year during deer season for driving 100 yards down a well worn crop road, it was dry, with no risk of fire, no mud etc....mind you someone, im thinking it was him had been driving this road on a daily basis and fresh tire tracks were to be seen. It was a at mile line which could be argued to be public domain. Regardless, he was mad I was in my truck glassing a herd of mule deer a mile away that frequented the walk in down at the bottom of the hill a half mile away. I was simply pulled to the lookout point for the area where you could have a good vantage point and see a couple miles away from the top of ridge. I heard through the grapevine his "daddy" was after one of the muley bucks, hence the reason for his nasty temperment. I didnt even have a mule deer tag, I just enjoy observing. There was cut stubble on both sides of me. I did not veer off the road. However I took the chewing, killed him with kindness and apologized for any misunderstanding. I think he overreacted and I did nothing wrong, however he had no social skills and I just let it slide. What was funny was that he put 4 stakes up with a sign he probably spent about 2 hours painting saying keep off the next day. Lord, people act crazy when it comes to deer. They simply lose their minds.

 

[-Wildcat-]

Regardless of your thoughts on the issue, some people in this thread are getting entirely too upset regarding a bill that hasn't even passed legislation yet, and getting far too defensive in their responses.

If you're that concerned, write your representative. If you get super wound up reading a discussion/opinion forum, you may want to pursue another leisurely form of entertainment.

I believe in common sense. You're not hurting anything by grabbing a bird. Anyone that would chew you out for doing so has a stick up their ass, landowner, farmer, rancher taxpayer or not.

Back on topic...I still believe common sense could and should rule the day. You dont see people calling the cops or threatening the neighbor kid with a gun for retrieving the ball that went over the fence into your yard.

Seems dumb a law would even need to be made about this and that we are even debating it. Just my .02

People are too easily offended and get their feathers ruffled to easily. Also too many people abuse the sytem, but those people have been around since the dawn of time, law or no law. We all know whats right and wrong, we dont need the govt to tell us how to run our everyday lives. Theres a point where too much is toooo much. I think this would be an example of that.

You must have posted this as I was typing, spot on sir. (I did remove the subsidy part though )

 

[kansasbrittany]

It is indeed simple.

You speak of "tempted" ....get your facts straight...I am not ever tempted to trespass. The dog may be by scent but, I, am not.
Watch who you indict incorrectly as to attitude and intent.
QUOTE]

Take a breather man. He's not attacking you. He said, "tempted OR put in a situation." Please understand where these folks are coming from. They see this as another reason for guys like you and I to make an excuse for unlawful trespass. If you're not the type to do it, you don't have much to worry about. I think he was walking on eggshells as it was to make his point. Internet communication is difficult (and sometimes offensive when it's not intended to be that way) b/c you don't see facial expressions. I know b/c I was too sensitive to comments like that not so long ago. Your points are well-taken, but in Shadow's case, not agreed with. He didn't mean any personal harm.

I personally feel my dog is my responsibility. Typically they don't make it more than 10 or 20 yards into an ajoining property w/o me issuing some discipline. I've never had a problem w/ one taking off across someone else's property.

I don't think the landowner should have the right to shoot my dog necessarily since a dog can't read signs, but I don't think it should be a crime for a guy to go get his dog that has found its way onto someone's land.....WITHOUT a gun that is. If they're not going to pass the bill, an alternative would be a requirement for landowners put their # on their fence so someone could contact them to retrieve their dog (obviously not everyone would like that idea either). I would go get my dog at any cost....sorry, but my dogs are like my kids and sometimes my kids wonder off (MORE OFTEN THAN MY BIRD DOGS IN FACT!!). Nothing will stop me from going to get either one of them. I'd do time in jail for it if that's what it took (not b/c of the monitary value of them either)

However, I do agree that MR Byrd and other landowners have the right to know if I have a need to trespass. There are so many absentee landowners that a law like this may be in order. If it were always easy to find the person that owns the land and ask permission (and everyone had honest intent), we wouldn't need to have this discussion.

Hell, if everyone was honest, this wouldn't be a problem at all now would it? Funny how we have a group of guys that I assume are pretty honest involved in this argument.....maybe that's why they don't understand. They're honest and wouldn't trespass w/ BS intentions.

 

[Peterson]

The "you" in "you won't be tempted"....goes toward grouping all who trespass in one lump...my response is based on not wanting to be placed in one lump.
There are many reasons why an illegal trespass can occur.

Readers do have a responsibility toward trying to understand a poster...as posters have a responsibility toward what they post.
We all can do better.

 

[carptom1]

ultimately the responsibility for my dog falls on me, not the landowner. I don't believe i need to " shock the crap out of my dog" to get him back, but i also do not allow him to range 2-300 yards out in front of me. What Mr Byrd is saying, i understand completely. Can you imagine working all year on your property and have to defend it all year? Hell you get to feel like you can't even leave during hunting season for fear of tresspassers. The way this proposal reads to me is that as long as you have a dog you can follow them wherever you want. It seems pretty vague to me.

 

[V-John]

No one answered. Doesn't the bill state that if the landowner tells you to get off, you have to get off the land?

I promise, I will go and get my dog, regardless of legality. I won't stay on the land, I won't hunt on the land, I won't do anything more then get my dog. But that being said, my dog is the most important thing to me, and I will get the dog.

 

[sas]

I think I have read this somewhere in the Kansas regulations "person must make all reasonable efforts to retrieve wounded game". Next a statue says you can go on posted property to retrieve until you are ordered off. You must leave immediately.

Today if you wound a bird you can (and are actually regulated) to cross the fence and attempt to retreive. It doesn't say anything about leaving your gun, etc.

Now, obviously this creates a large loophole for someone to unethically enter posted land and hunt along the line. If caught, they can plead "act of retrieving" and get off. Unfortunately there are hunters who routinely break the rules realizing that the odds are in their favor.

As far as going after my dog I feel I must go after him and take the consequences. What if he is headed for the highway? Or getting lost late in the day? You may not be able to find and ask permission of the landowner.

I honestly don't think there is anyway they can make any rule that doesn't have loopholes and is fair to everyone. They never have. Violaters with no ethics don't care about the rules. That in turn hurts the rest of us.

 

[V-John]

I think I have read this somewhere in the Kansas regulations "person must make all reasonable efforts to retrieve wounded game". Next a statue says you can go on posted property to retrieve until you are ordered off. You must leave immediately.

Today if you wound a bird you can (and are actually regulated) to cross the fence and attempt to retreive. It doesn't say anything about leaving your gun, etc.

Now, obviously this creates a large loophole for someone to unethically enter posted land and hunt along the line. If caught, they can plead "act of retrieving" and get off. Unfortunately there are hunters who routinely break the rules realizing that the odds are in their favor.

As far as going after my dog I feel I must go after him and take the consequences. What if he is headed for the highway? Or getting lost late in the day? You may not be able to find and ask permission of the landowner.

I honestly don't think there is anyway they can make any rule that doesn't have loopholes and is fair to everyone. They never have. Violaters with no ethics don't care about the rules. That in turn hurts the rest of us.

Absolutely agree.

 

[Shadow]

The "you" in "you won't be tempted"....goes toward grouping all who trespass in one lump...my response is based on not wanting to be placed in one lump.
There are many reasons why an illegal trespass can occur.

Readers do have a responsibility toward trying to understand a poster...as posters have a responsibility toward what they post.
We all can do better.

I'd ask that you rethink- you aren't sitting on a large farm in prime pheasant country and seen all sorts of "why shouldn't I and what is anyone going to do about it"

you did state it correctly- "illegal trespass"

 

[Shadow]

um John- read the regulations- states you must make an effort to retrive wounded game- it does not say you can go on posted property

 

[Peterson]

I'd ask that you rethink- you aren't sitting on a large farm in prime pheasant country and seen all sorts of "why shouldn't I and what is anyone going to do about it"....

You lost me on that one????