new regulation vote
12-04-2009, 04:42 PM
#1
Fork Horn
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: northern USA
Posts: 274
new regulation vote
How many of you would vote for a regulation in your state if it read as such?
"Float hunting (on a river, lake, pond, stream) through private land with the intent to kill deer is prohibited unless prior authorization from the landowner has been granted. Float hunting where water borders public land is permissible"
Yes or no would be good and if your state already has some sort of regulation like this would be nice to know as well. Any additional thoughts?
"Float hunting (on a river, lake, pond, stream) through private land with the intent to kill deer is prohibited unless prior authorization from the landowner has been granted. Float hunting where water borders public land is permissible"
Yes or no would be good and if your state already has some sort of regulation like this would be nice to know as well. Any additional thoughts?
12-04-2009, 04:56 PM
#3
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 1,304
My first instincts, and without much thought, is to vote "Yes" on such a regulation. Most all the deer will be on land... land that belongs to someone who pays the taxes and is owner of that land. A very small percentage will be in the water and when you take a shot, most likely will run up on shore onto someone's else's property.
Now I haven't considered this enough to make an educated decision, so I'm curious as to the replies because there may be good reason to vote "No', although I can't see that happening at the moment.
iSnipe
Now I haven't considered this enough to make an educated decision, so I'm curious as to the replies because there may be good reason to vote "No', although I can't see that happening at the moment.
iSnipe
12-04-2009, 06:19 PM
#4
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: IL
Posts: 6,575
?
This is the worst proposal ever!
From my western game research I do, I believe there are some great units that are entirely blocked by private land unless you float a river to get to them, so this is what I envision when you talk about such a proposal, essentially any public land that is locked by private land would now become un usable by such a law and therefore I totally would not be in favor of it.
This is the worst proposal ever!
From my western game research I do, I believe there are some great units that are entirely blocked by private land unless you float a river to get to them, so this is what I envision when you talk about such a proposal, essentially any public land that is locked by private land would now become un usable by such a law and therefore I totally would not be in favor of it.
12-04-2009, 06:38 PM
#5
Boone & Crockett
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,679
Against it as it is worded right now.
It should read something like....
"Float hunting (on a river, lake, pond, stream) within the confines of private land with the intent to kill deer within that private land is prohibited unless prior authorization from the landowner has been granted.
Float hunting with the intent to kill deer on public land where water borders public land is permissible.
Floating (on a river, lake, pond, stream) through private land with the intent to access public land that is bordered by the river, lake, pond, or stream that the hunter is floating on is permissible.
Shooting big game animals that are in water is prohibited"
It should read something like....
"Float hunting (on a river, lake, pond, stream) within the confines of private land with the intent to kill deer within that private land is prohibited unless prior authorization from the landowner has been granted.
Float hunting with the intent to kill deer on public land where water borders public land is permissible.
Floating (on a river, lake, pond, stream) through private land with the intent to access public land that is bordered by the river, lake, pond, or stream that the hunter is floating on is permissible.
Shooting big game animals that are in water is prohibited"
12-05-2009, 08:52 AM
#7
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 1,304
Yes, I like the new amending. I knew I was missing something.
Had a person want to float through water, in reference to deer hunting, with private land on both sides, they wouldn't be able to as the current wording stands. The amended version would allow such a float if the party wanted to pass through to get to public land.
So "No" on the 1st version.
iSnipe
Had a person want to float through water, in reference to deer hunting, with private land on both sides, they wouldn't be able to as the current wording stands. The amended version would allow such a float if the party wanted to pass through to get to public land.
So "No" on the 1st version.
iSnipe
12-05-2009, 09:51 AM
#8
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 824
Against it as it is worded right now.
It should read something like....
"Float hunting (on a river, lake, pond, stream) within the confines of private land with the intent to kill deer within that private land is prohibited unless prior authorization from the landowner has been granted.
Float hunting with the intent to kill deer on public land where water borders public land is permissible.
Floating (on a river, lake, pond, stream) through private land with the intent to access public land that is bordered by the river, lake, pond, or stream that the hunter is floating on is permissible.
Shooting big game animals that are in water is prohibited"
It should read something like....
"Float hunting (on a river, lake, pond, stream) within the confines of private land with the intent to kill deer within that private land is prohibited unless prior authorization from the landowner has been granted.
Float hunting with the intent to kill deer on public land where water borders public land is permissible.
Floating (on a river, lake, pond, stream) through private land with the intent to access public land that is bordered by the river, lake, pond, or stream that the hunter is floating on is permissible.
Shooting big game animals that are in water is prohibited"
12-05-2009, 04:55 PM
#9
Typical Buck
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 564
Could someone provide me with the rules governing waterways and private property. And with rules I mean cited laws not what you thinks or have been told. I have been told that property owners own the river (pretty sure it is false). I have been told that they own the ground under the river. (I don't know one way or the other). I have also been told that the high water mark of a navigable river is a public easement even if there is no water at that level currently.
Lots and lots of answers, but I have never been able to have a person cite the law supporting their veiw of river access through private property.