Booner
Well-Known Member
I'm confused on the trespassing part? Is this really the key factor limiting guys in wanting to get the law passed for being able to track with dogs, guys are worried about people using them as a tool to "push" deer off others farms?
Liv4Rut
Active Member
I bet I checked it at least 30 times to see the poll results myself. The phone makes it easy to check. I bet most the views are from people who are checking on results after they vote vs people who opened it and did not vote. Who knows I guess.
gunrunr
Life Member
When the IBA polled members on this very subject two years ago, the majority said that increased trespassing was their major concern and that they wanted it voted down. The only contact I remember in support was from someone who raised tracking dogs for sale and on his website he admitted to illegally tracking deer in Iowa, just so happens the same individual was the one who was sponsoring the bill.
I voted Yes, but only with registered dogs and heavy fines for trespass.
Those of you who don't understand how trespassing plays a part of this must not own their own land. We have huge problems around us with trespassing and a lot of trouble with coon & coyote hounds or more specifically the way people run them with zero regard for the landowner.
I voted Yes, but only with registered dogs and heavy fines for trespass.
Those of you who don't understand how trespassing plays a part of this must not own their own land. We have huge problems around us with trespassing and a lot of trouble with coon & coyote hounds or more specifically the way people run them with zero regard for the landowner.
Booner
Well-Known Member
We understand perfectly, however you are inferring that this "may" increase with this law passing however you honestly think people who do those types of things (break game laws) give two ***ts about laws or even game laws for that matter. If they want it they are going to do it regardless if it gets passed. I know guys who have used dogs to recover game as without that dog they wouldn't have found that deer. This was also on land the guy gained access fr the landowner of which he didn't not hunt. Seems to be the problem is landowners who also hunt. The recurring theme seems to be that you select few forget you are hunting wild animals of which you do not own. You own the ground not the deer, don't forget that.
Last edited:
flugge
Well-Known Member
I have no opinion on this, but having my own ground, I would want to make sure ANYONE with a dog would ask first. Not that I would care, but I would want to know. Now IMO, anyone that says people that dont care now still wont, I agree with you.. but then again, people that say they know people that used dogs already, well you are basically siding in that same group knowingly breaking the law??? Correct??
Booner
Well-Known Member
You are exactly correct. Laws are laws, however i have every right to recover my game and if a tracking dog is going to help me I'm going to use it. Do you drive the speed limit every day, did you wait until your 21st to drink? Have you ever been in a fight? Point proven, laws are laws you are correct however certain instances justify a "bending". Let's also not forget we are talking about hunting not committing murder. Though some landowners think of "their" deer as "their" property there lies the issue.
Daver
PMA Member
I perceive some inconsistencies in your opinions Booner, on one hand you say that "laws are laws" and you then go on to say that "certain instances justify a bending". Who decides which laws can get bent and by how much and when, etc? If two of us disagree about which law can be bent, or by how much or in what circumstances, which one is right? How does that get resolved, etc?
Speaking for myself only, and as a landowner and hunter, I do not think of any deer as "mine", even if we happen to know that a particular deer spends nearly all of its' time on our farm, etc. I do though think of the land that I am paying for, maintaining and managing as mine and after spending A LOT of time and money to build a good place to hunt I am not at all interested in settling into a tree stand one fine November morning only to have someone, or multiple someone's, and their dog, or multiple dogs, traipse through my timber "looking for a deer".
If it's a neighbor that I know and there is a wounded animal, etc, then I will the first to aid that search. Right now, I am fortunate to have ALL excellent neighbors, but up until a year ago, I could not say that. For a few years, I had one dipwad that literally went out of his way to disrupt others in the neighborhood for no good reason other than some of us had asked him NOT to walk all over our ground, sometimes randomly firing his pistols and at other times allowing friends of his to hunt my ground, both for deer and arrowheads.
If there was a loosely written law that allowed him to effectively walk his dog on my farm without my permission, then I can virtually guarantee you that he would have been arrowhead hunting, err, I mean, looking for a wounded deer with his "tracking dog(s)", every day of the season, particularly after a nice rain that may wash new artifacts up to the surface...where the dog can pick up the blood trail you see.
It's not the honest guys with real tracking dogs that I am concerned with, it is the dishonest guys that would potentially have a ready made, iron clad excuse to trespass where they would not otherwise be allowed to go. Sometimes, well intentioned laws can have unintended consequences.
petey33
Member
I do not own land and don't feel anyone owns the deer they are hunting. Ownership implies I could take the deer whenever I wanted. Not true and not in the spirit of fair chase hunting. I do however only cross fences with permission and stay within the land I have permission to hunt on. While I feel tracking dogs have a place and I would consider using one if legal, I'm not sure we are ready for this at this time. I am leary of unintended consequences and an inability or unwillingness to enforce these laws much the same as trespassing laws are frequently difficult to enforce or not enforced. I would much rather not have this option than have more dogs than are already being run without permission on the property I hunt.
gunrunr
Life Member
Not sure why you are inferring things about me that you dont know.
Remember, I voted FOR the tracking dog law under the right set of rules, not against.
I know I dont own the game - shoot it on your side of the fence and I'll be the first to congratulate you. Shoot it on my side of the fence and you'll be visiting a judge.
I have also never once turned anyone down wanting to track a deer on my property. If fact I will frequently go help them.
I have been burned before by allowing someone to "track a wounded deer" - I let a guy go track one once that I didn't go along with and he brought in a crew of 8 guys carrying guns and proceeded to hunt and push out my entire property pretending they were "searching" - some people just take advantage of laws and twist them in their favor.
Booner
Well-Known Member
Last edited:
JNRBRONC
Well-Known Member
If I'm reading this poll correctly, 77 of you can't track deer, 3 of you are still learning and 5 of you don't hunt...
Gotta love statistics, distort 'em to suit your cause.
My spin: 77 people want to maximize the chances of recovery on every wounded deer.
wapsi-bottom-BP
Active Member
If I'm reading this poll correctly, 77 of you can't track deer, 3 of you are still learning and 5 of you don't hunt...
I voted yes with registration n heavy fines.. I own land, hunt my land, consider myself to be an excellent woodsman, I feel that I have better than average tracking skills, tracked many der for a lot of friends!! But if needed I would use a tracking dog if I couldn't find a deer.. I dont think it'd ever work if they let just anyone use a dog to track with, but if every county had a few DNR registered/trained handlers n dogs with a strict set of guidelines, I wouldnt see many problems at all!!! Very heavy fines if the registered (professional) handlers use it to run deer or whatever the concern is??? I think the handler would have to use their own discretion to decide if there is a blood trail or evidence of a wounded deer before using the dog, and be subject to penalties if they dont follow set guidelines. .
