No more bacon for you

#51
In South Dakota, it's mostly private land.

You go onto another man's land without permission....you can expect them to either come give you a visit (assuredly armed) or have the Game Warden/Sheriff escort you off in cuffs.

No trespassing means no trespassing.

We don't have the pig problem since we get too cold here but if we magically did....

The law would probably be the same as it is with other varmint/predators that can actually pose a threat to people. You can legally shoot them from the road/vehicle (given not on a highway or interstate)....you just can't trespass to pick them up.

Most of the time, if you shot say a coyote and simply drove to the nearby farmstead and politely asked.....they'll let you go get it on foot unarmed with little care. Because they/we know you could've just as easily been a fuck and did it without permission. A little common sense goes a long ways. And as long as your not shooting our livestock or buildings or family members.....the act only helps us.

I imagine Kentucky from all the episodes of Justified I've watched is heavily wooded. And shooting in hilly wooded terrain makes knowing what's on the other side of that hill tricky. But if I know anything about those who take night hunting serious....they easily enough can become accustomed to the layout of the land.
 
#53
308pirate said:
So in which states do people have free access to others' lands?
Click to expand...
New York State was a free fire zone (metaphorically) when I lived up there. I had a buddy that lived outside of Ithaca, and it was pretty common for deer hunters to walk through his back yard. I was bow hunting land (with land owner permission) that he had “exclusive rights” to and had a shotgun hunter walk under my blind. Another time, I set up my blind and had a trespasser set up nearly in the next tree over. In the North East, East, and even in to his native Nebraska, the most common refrain is “fences are for cows, signs are for people.”

Down here in Texas, don’t cross a fence line without explicit landowner permission, regardless of signage…
 
  • Like
Reactions: davere
#54
Anybody who comes onto my property gets personally and usually cheerfully greeted with a smile...and I'm armed. No gun left in the truck, it is either on my hip or in my hand (muzzle in safe direction). I've yet to have had to be a dick, but I've damn sure put honesty into a couple of meth heads who wanted to see the layout of my place. You don't come onto this ranch by accident.

There is no way Kentucky passed that law without some pockets getting lined. My guess is that there is some money to be made in trapping there.

Give it 3 years, and Kentucky's feral hog population will triple. Your average sow will throw two litters per year, but it can be up to three. You have to kill 70% annually just to keep the numbers at the current level.

In no way if I were a landowner in KY would I let that stupid law keep me from killing pigs that were on it. SSS.
 
  • Like
  • Wow
Reactions: crackerbrown, 308pirate and IronSkillet
#56
I read the law. It’s basically what Kansas has done. If they have the budget and determination to do the helo ops on snow covered ground they can eliminate the problem.

Kentucky had the same issues did. Hunters buying hogs and releasing them on the property of others.

If a few hog releasers are caught and punished will stop the spread.

Landowners can shoot hogs but reporting them is encouraged.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chris W.
#57
RTH1800 said:
I read the law. It’s basically what Kansas has done. If they have the budget and determination to do the helo ops on snow covered ground they can eliminate the problem.

Kentucky had the same issues did. Hunters buying hogs and releasing them on the property of others.

If a few hog releasers are caught and punished will stop the spread.

Landowners can shoot hogs but reporting them is encouraged.
Click to expand...
Seems like it would be incredibly hard to catch the assholes releasing the hogs. The fines and jail time are going to need to be biblical.
 
#58
Feral hogs.

You don't need to go anywhere except local to get some hogs.
Turn them loose near water.

Thier offspring are feral?

Who knows how many are let loose when hog prices go down and feed goes up.

Feral hogs, just another cash crop export for Texas.

By the way huge expenses of Kansas are fairly flat and not thickly tree covered in large areas when I lived there.

I have not been to Kentucky but pictures and shows make a lot of it look hilly / mountains covered in a canopy of trees.

I don't think the choppers will be as effective.

You will just end up with faster leaner hogs that develope better hearing.
 
#59
Eastern Ks is forested and hilly. This is where the hogs were. Deciduous trees drop leaves and snow really makes the hogs show up.
The program is ran by the department of agriculture. Hogs are DNA tested and source is determined.
 
#60
B y r o n said:
This is Kentucky's answer to the problem.

95% of land in Kentucky is privately owned. If you are a farmer or rancher would you want people you don't know to come onto your land.

I've only lived here a relatively short time but think Kentucky Fish and Wildlife is doing a pretty good job. It is one of the few states without CWD and is able to export health deer to other states that have been plagued.
Click to expand...
How frequently and aggressively is the state testing for CWD? It is easy to say we haven’t discovered XY&Z by simply not looking for it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RTH1800
#61
RTH1800 said:
I read the law. It’s basically what Kansas has done. If they have the budget and determination to do the helo ops on snow covered ground they can eliminate the problem.
Click to expand...
Helo ops work in the plain states. Not in a place with Kentucky's topography and vegetation.
 
#62
RTH1800 said:
Eastern Ks is forested and hilly. This is where the hogs were. Deciduous trees drop leaves and snow really makes the hogs show up.
The program is ran by the department of agriculture. Hogs are DNA tested and source is determined.
Click to expand...
I lived in KS for 9 years and I've been to pretty much any region of the state.

I also live 1 hrs north of Kentucky and over the last 20 years I have seen enough of it to know that KY forested and hilly is not the same as KS forested and hilly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RTH1800
#63
IronSkillet said:
How frequently and aggressively is the state testing for CWD? It is easy to say we haven’t discovered XY&Z by simply not looking for it.
Click to expand...

They do test but don't recall frequency. When a deer tested positive just South of the state line in TN, they made mandatory check-in stations in counties nearby. They also prohibited baiting because it congregates deer which would make spreading easier. No deer where found to have CWD.
 
#66
We have our share of wild hogs here in North Florida, they are in the swamps, in the outskirts of the cities, in the gated community of the well to do & where ever they go, they destroy the land. Nobody cares about the swamps, but when a vast expanse of golf course or the gated community lawns are destroyed overnight, the phones start ringing to Florida Game & Fish Commision

The state parks are also being destroyed & don't get caught in there with a weapon hunting for hogs; you will do jail time for that.

Kentucky was a place I used to want to live, but I like Florida better as we are smart enough to kill off any non native wildlife that is destroying the state!
 
#67
So far, in Texas, it is always open season on feral hog. No bag limit, no weapon restrictions.

The only time one is restricted is on the public land where I hunt. They lock it from March until in April, they open back up for eastern spring turkey. Main reason for closing the compartments is to take hunting pressure off the land for at least a month.

We even have companies that rent out helos and AR-15's.

Go to 04:15 to get to the action.

 
#68
308pirate said:
So in which states do people have free access to others' lands?
Click to expand...
North Dakota (for hunters). Unless you post it. Basically an opt-out structure.

If you think about it, it makes sense for the common (un-landed) man, but also for landowners who are either generous or want pests gone.

Preserves the right of landowners to limit access (or not!) while allowing others without the luxury of private land to come in on unposted land.

North Dakota is fucking EMPTY man. Makes particular sense there, but would seem to make sense anywhere (to me).

Options are good…this is a way for gov to make most people happy by government getting out of the way of dictating who can hunt on land.
 
Last edited:
#70
308pirate said:
This has nothing to do with government. Having control of who can access one's property transcends it.
Click to expand...
What I’m saying is the government got out of the role of deciding who gets to go on your land.

If you don’t care, don’t post it (meaning, don’t post no trespassing signs). If you care, then post it.
 
#71
In other words, if the (government’s) law of the land is that it’s default illegal to go onto other’s rural land, then the landowner can’t “unpost” it for the general population.

In other words, landowners can’t make it “un-illegal” (legal).

In ND, it’s up to the landowner if “trespass” is legal/illegal, not the government.
 
#72
Hunting land that you don’t have explicit permission to hunt, from the land owner, just because there is no sign, is just one step below entering someone’s home to use the kitchen sink because the front door was unlocked.
 
#73
Last edited:
#74
hlee said:
Hunting land that you don’t have explicit permission to hunt, from the land owner, just because there is no sign, is just one step below entering someone’s home to use the kitchen sink because the front door was unlocked.
Click to expand...
Works in ND? 🤷‍♂️

You guys may not understand the space out there. Lots of gigantic areas with no houses on them.

Certainly not something that I’d suggest in a quasi-“rural” area, where you can see someone’s house from the road or from your own house. I mean, it’s laughable to me that that is sort of density is called rural.

That arrangement is just a suburban sub-division by a different name.

I mean, heck guys, it’s not like ND is liberal NY or CA.
 
#75
Yep, it’s hard for a Texan to understand large areas…

IMG_6169.jpeg


Fuck off Alaska. No one is talking to you.

The point is, unless you’ve talked to me and have permission from me to enter my property, stay the fuck off. This is a common courtesy- it’s common self preservation in TX- that everyone should just understand.
 
  • Like
Reactions: davere
#76
hlee said:
Yep, it’s hard for a Texan to understand large areas…

View attachment 8445208

Fuck off Alaska. No one is talking to you.

The point is, unless you’ve talked to me and have permission from me to enter my property, stay the fuck off. This is a common courtesy- it’s common self preservation in TX- that everyone should just understand.
Click to expand...
Hey, obviously not referring to you, right? That’s why I said, “may not understand.”

Here is a summary of ND hunting/land law.
www.swlattorneys.com

POSTED - It's Not That Easy Anymore | SW&L Attorneys - Fargo, ND

Are you up to date on the most current North Dakota posting regulations that took effect on August 1, 2021? Learn more from SW&L Attorneys.
www.swlattorneys.com www.swlattorneys.com

It’s a little weird to wrap your head around, but it doesn’t dent landowner rights at all. Just takes a (very) small amount of work to post the land, especially now it’s able to be done electronically.

Without such a thing, un-landed citizens would have very little options for hunting in ND.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chris W.
#77
carbonbased said:
You guys may not understand the space out there. Lots of gigantic areas with no houses on them.
Click to expand...
Sounds like a lot of work for the landowner to post. I know I must have a couple of miles of property line, and it’s wooded enough it would take a ton of signs so they’d be reasonably visible.

I think it would be better to require permission. Have the landowners post “Permission Granted” signs. Default should be no permission.

Edit: didn’t/don’t know anything about electronic posting.
 
  • Like
Reactions: carbonbased
#78
Norther said:
Sounds like a lot of work for the landowner to post. I know I must have a couple of miles of property line, and it’s wooded enough it would take a ton of signs so they’d be reasonably visible.

I think it would be better to require permission. Have the landowners post “Permission Granted” signs. Default should be no permission.
Click to expand...
A number of years ago, you would have a small point in flat-ass ND, although you post signs once and they last a long time.

It helps that there are no large population centers nearby and that living there requires a certain, ah, resistance to weather that you don’t find in 99.999% of the world (Siberia has us beat, however).

So both factors help to limit the yahoos, retards, and frat boys fucking up your stuff.

But now you can electronically post on the internet. Like, near zero effort. Hunters are required to check the internet database (onXhunt is great here).

But I get it. Probably not for everyone. Lots of land there has no one living on it.

But make no mistake, ND is far, far, far from some liberal state. The government is out of the biz of policing your land. It’s up to you, and it was done for the good of outdoorsmen.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Chris W.
#79
Last edited:
#81
carbonbased said:
The government is out of the biz of policing your land. It’s up to you, and it was done for the good of outdoorsmen.
Click to expand...
The government is ALWAYS in the business of policing private property trespass.

Explain how is it right to force landowners to pay money and effort to "claim" a right (trespass) they already have.
 
#82
308pirate said:
Are you an attorney?

Clearly not because you don't understand the first fucking thing about that court case.
Click to expand...
Hester’s narrow view of the Fourth Amendment eviscerated Americans’ constitutional rights. Worse, it was based on a false premise: that the “distinction between [open fields] and the house is as old as the common law,” a distinction that was about when private individuals could be charged with burglary, not about when government officers could intrude on private property. Still, the damage was done.
 
#83
Tcorb734 said:
Hester’s narrow view of the Fourth Amendment eviscerated Americans’ constitutional rights. Worse, it was based on a false premise: that the “distinction between [open fields] and the house is as old as the common law,” a distinction that was about when private individuals could be charged with burglary, not about when government officers could intrude on private property. Still, the damage was done.
Click to expand...
Copy and paste is not the same as understanding. The case centers about a violation of the fourth Anendment. Only government can violate the Bill of Rights.

Now take a month off this forum to go learn jurisprudence 101.
 
#84
hlee said:
New York State was a free fire zone....
Click to expand...

I thought you were talking about the pigs, because it was. The state announced there were more an more reports of feral pigs, they were a destructive, invasive species and that they should be shot on sight! Killed any time, any how, without limit, kill as many as possible!! (very unNewYork.gov of them)

Then a year or two later they announced trapping or killing wild swine was illegal!!!! Because "hunters were releasing boars, to increase the population and hunting opportunities." Oh yes, yes, I remember guys running down to the local Eurasian Swine store every Friday night after pay day and picking up a half dozen males... :D

More "government logic", like trying to stop mass murder by making some place a gun free zone.
I'm sure there may have been a few people (in a state of 18-20 million) who had the means and logistics to facilitate that happening, but if they do, they probably aren't going to stop because you made it "illegal".

You killing them is bad for business. Especially with no tags meaning no extra revenue. And no funding to "study" them and trap them, no new departments, no new department heads, no new positions under them. Then they contract it out, create a new department for another layer of bureaucracy to oversee the contractors. I worked for the state for a long time, they love that shit. Cut a job that paid $50k, then restructure departments to "save money", then create a new $120k job to oversee the restructure. They spend thousands to save hundreds.
 
Last edited:
#85
308pirate said:
The government is ALWAYS in the business of policing private property trespass.

Explain how is it right to force landowners to pay money and effort to "claim" a right (trespass) they already have.
Click to expand...
Reducing the rights of private property owners a very little bit for the good of outdoorsmen is similar to city statutes requiring homeowners to snow-blow the city-owned sidewalks going through their property.

Why? Of course, for the good of people that walk, even though the city government should be the ones who clear the sidewalks. Just as they do for the streets.

I understand the opposite point of view. I’m just explaining North Dakota, I guess.
 
#86
308pirate said:
Copy and paste is not the same as understanding. The case centers about a violation of the fourth Anendment. Only government can violate the Bill of Rights.

Now take a month off this forum to go learn jurisprudence 101.
Click to expand...
I realize you're not understanding the reason government agents are allowed on your 'open fields.' It is because it's accepted that people are allowed to be in your open fields, whether or not the fields are posted no trespassing.
 
#88
Tcorb734 said:
I realize you're not understanding the reason government agents are allowed on your 'open fields.' It is because it's accepted that people are allowed to be in your open fields, whether or not the fields are posted no trespassing.
Click to expand...
You absolutely have no idea of what you're talking about. Come to Ohio and try your open fields idea. I'll enjoy watching you leave in chains.
 
#90
308pirate said:
You absolutely have no idea of what you're talking about. Come to Ohio and try your open fields idea. I'll enjoy watching you leave in chains.
Click to expand...
First, it isn't my "open fields" doctrine (I believe it shouldn't exist). It is an established ruling. Second, I live in ohio and have seen property owners get arrested for harassing trespassers. I'm merely trying to expose you to laws and regulations that have been in place for centuries.
 
#91
Tcorb734 said:
First, it isn't my "open fields" doctrine (I believe it shouldn't exist). It is an established ruling. Second, I live in ohio and have seen property owners get arrested for harassing trespassers. I'm merely trying to expose you to laws and regulations that have been in place for centuries.
Click to expand...

You still do not get the simple fact that the court case you reference, and all jurisprudence that flows from it, applies ONLY to state agents in the performance of their duties.

It has absolutely fuck all to do with criminal trespass.

"Harassing" trespassers is a bullshit strawman.
 
#92
My experience in Ks is that a landowner is more likely to be arrested than a trespasser should things get heated. The state is beholden to the non resident trespasser who buys the expensive licenses.
There is simply no end to the excuses that are made to support not charging trespassers. Don’t you dare insult them though.
 
#93
RTH1800 said:
My experience in Ks is that a landowner is more likely to be arrested than a trespasser should things get heated. The state is beholden to the non resident trespasser who buys the expensive licenses.
There is simply no end to the excuses that are made to support not charging trespassers. Don’t you dare insult them though.
Click to expand...
TLDR:

So, what I am hearing is, insult the trespasser and the agent that frees them. Got it, thanks.
 
#95
Snuby642 said:
You'all got some messed up laws.

Land owners should have the right to say who goes on thier land or not.
Click to expand...
I agree. I have literally caught dozens of trespassers and poachers over the years. Only recall two being prosecuted. Fines were tiny. It is a joke.

One game warden told me “if you don’t like it sell your land”

It’s unimaginably bad.
 
  • Angry
Reactions: Snuby642
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

C
Recommend me a Suppressor for V Seven Creed
Replies
16
Views
373
bigjake83
bigjake83
John Barleycorn
DPMS Panther as a Hog Rifle
Replies
4
Views
201
John Barleycorn
John Barleycorn
RIP_K9_Ravi
Who runs a chest rig? What do you use?
Replies
72
Views
4K
tucaz
tucaz
DeathBeforeDismount
Hunting & Fishing Cellular Game Cams
Replies
26
Views
361
jrassy
jrassy
T
Biden reveals his illegal invasion plan. Well, duh.
Replies
19
Views
741
OldSalty2
OldSalty2
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Merch
Alerts