LD559 Landowner rights vs. Hunting rights

320 posts / 0 new
Last post
apondsong
Offline
Joined: 02/23/2004 - 1:01am
LD559 Landowner rights vs. Hunting rights

This is a place to share your thoughts about this bill. The room for the hearing was packed solid. Both sides spoke well.

If you attended the hearing...what are your thoughts? If not, what are your thoughts anyway.

IN A NUTSHELL: A bill that would require written landowner permision from those hunting bobcat, bear or coyotes with hounds.

PLEASE KEEP IT CIVIL AND ON TOPIC

pmrmsm
Offline
Joined: 05/08/2006 - 10:52am
Not to mention that the land

Not to mention that the land owners also have to paint the trees on the boundries of their property in purple paint. If you have a large area of land like a couple hundred acres or more...that is a heck of a lot of trees to mark. It would be easier to say no than to mark all those trees and to also provide written permission to all the hunters that you allow to hunt on the property either for a day, a week, or a season.

Just my two cents.

HP 442 / LD 559

Eric Kingsley
Offline
Joined: 07/02/2010 - 9:55am
I haven't followed every

I haven't followed every detail of this bill, and won't. In general, Maine landowners are and have been more than generous with their land, and I hope and pray that tradition continues.

I believe some self restraint and peer pressure on the part of the hunting community could resolve most issues, but when that doesn't happen the remedy is too often a change in law, written to address a bad situation created by a small handful of actors. That is unfortunate.

LarryB
Offline
Joined: 02/02/2005 - 1:01am
Currently, landowners can

Currently, landowners can post their property by painting two parallel white bands around trees bounding their land. What will the purple stripes denote that the white ones don't?

Naran
Offline
Joined: 10/06/2004 - 12:01am
APS - thank you for making

APS - thank you for making your guidelines so clear. Much appreciated.

apondsong
Offline
Joined: 02/23/2004 - 1:01am
Apparently there was a

Apparently there was a significant amount of snickering and scoffing from the "opposed" side, as some of those who supported the bill, spoke their testimony. Since part of the problem is (was) disrespect shown toward the landowners (by those who used hound dogs)....this does not bode well for them. The committee got to see exhibited for themselves, one of the landowners major complaints; blatant disrespect of others rights. NOT GOOD !!

LarryB
Offline
Joined: 02/02/2005 - 1:01am
apondsong- I'm disgusted by

apondsong- I'm disgusted by people abusing other's property, and I have and will call the landowner (if I know who it is) or the authorities when I see it. Sportsmen must act as stewards of the properties they are allowed access to. That said, the remedy already exists, the property can be posted to prohibit trespassing entirely, or to allow entry by permission only.

Bullseye
Offline
Joined: 03/20/2000 - 1:01am
The title of the bill is

The title of the bill is flawed.
The land owner holds the rights.
The hunters only have rights on land they own.
The only exception I can see is if a hunter has a contract
to hunt on land of another the hunter has the rights specified
in the contract.

Naran
Offline
Joined: 10/06/2004 - 12:01am
Bill requiring written

Bill requiring written permission to use private property stirs sparks
By Mal Leary, Capitol News Service
Posted March 21, 2011, at 7:00 p.m.

AUGUSTA, Maine – Spurred by hunters and recreational vehicles damaging their land, several landowners and farmers asked lawmakers to approve a measure requiring those using their land to get written permission. It was a proposal that drew sharp opposition.

[url=http://new.bangordailynews.com/2011/03/21/politics/bill-requiring-writte... and link to Poll.[/url]

Snowalker
Offline
Joined: 01/13/2000 - 1:01am
Can someone tell me how a

Can someone tell me how a hound harms anyones property? This is typical of the non-hunter crowd to come up with such tripe. It's odd that I know a few people that post their property to no hunting or tresspassing but I see them on mine and others hunting or just walking along like it's theirs. I guess it only pertains to their property and their rights. You'd think they'd be afraid to be beyond their own limit!! Flatlanders...

FNG
Offline
Joined: 09/10/2004 - 12:01am
I knew it would take less

I knew it would take less than a page for the flatlander comments to roll.

apondsong
Offline
Joined: 02/23/2004 - 1:01am
Larry : Just to help clarify

Larry : Just to help clarify some misunderstandings ~~~~~~> Folks that grow organic crops and those who are raising sheep or horses have experienced major problems with hound dogs running around their property in the persuit, mostly, of coyote. These people live in areas where the coyotes aren't a problem to either their livestock or the deer. I guess if they are, they perfer to deal with it themselves. They want the choice; not to have dogs running (coyotes etc,) on their property. NOW...this is why the need for the bill:

You'd THINK that posting property would be enough ! It's not. Why? Because they tell the landowners: " my dogs can't read signs"....and they continue to let the dogs run, in complete disregard to the landowners wishes...because they can get away with it !! No law on the books to prevent it. I have my opinion about this. Most of you know it. So I want to hear yours.

A. O'Brien
Offline
Joined: 01/15/2011 - 2:18pm
The bill does not make the

The bill does not make the purple stripe mandatory. It is just an option because the aluminum paint doesn't show up too well. It's expensive to continually post your land and around here, the signs keep getting torn down. A number of individuals and farmers testified strongly in support of this proposal and the hunters didn't seem to have a big problem with it either.

I am hoping that we can find a productive solution to this problem as it has reached a boiling point around here. I know that traditional sportsmen are not happy with being painted in the same brush as the folks who are violating private property rights. The result has also been a rapid increase in land postings. Unfortunately, a loophole in the law allows hounds to be run on private land regardless of whether the land is posted or permission is granted. Hunting dogs are exempt from the dog control law. I don't think it's appropriate to blame landowners for the fact that hunters cannot control where their dogs go in pursuit of coyote. If people don't want dogs chasing predators across their land, they should have the right to have some peace and quiet.

LarryB
Offline
Joined: 02/02/2005 - 1:01am
Are said dog owners currently

Are said dog owners currently exempt from having to obey the "No Trespassing" signs while retrieving their animals?

thejohnchapman
Offline
Joined: 03/21/2000 - 1:01am
I think that a "tweak" to

I think that a "tweak" to title 7 might cure everyone's problems.

apondsong
Offline
Joined: 02/23/2004 - 1:01am
Tell us more John . "My ears

Tell us more John . "My ears are up".

apondsong
Offline
Joined: 02/23/2004 - 1:01am
Larry: I"m no expert... but I

Larry: I"m no expert... but I think the dog owners can be liable for trespass at any point if they are on posted land.

A. O'Brien
Offline
Joined: 01/15/2011 - 2:18pm
A tweak to Title 7 is in

A tweak to Title 7 is in order, but easier said than done ;)

I'm still trying to get a definitive answer on whether the hunter is entitled to pursue their dog on posted in land, because the law is kind of murky (though it hasn't stopped a lot of folks from doing that around here). I've heard stories from landowners who have said that hunters will often wait on the property line for their dog so as not to cross posted property. One fellow called the game warden about dog problems and was advised to trap the dog in his barn and call animal control. He waited for several hours and ended up having to feed and give the dog water. Eventually the dog was taken away and the hunter came and confronted the landowner fuming mad. I've heard a number of stories like this.

Butch Moore
Offline
Joined: 11/20/1999 - 1:01am
"I believe some self

"I believe some self restraint and peer pressure on the part of the hunting community could resolve most issues,,,"

It's been my experience that most people damaging, trashing, etc. others' land are not hunters. Remedies already exist for the issues I've heard mentioned, so I have to wonder if there's more to this bill, as in is it being pushed by anti-hunters from away? Also, is it a step in the direction of "pay to play" that exists in other states, where the landowners charge fees for access?

A. O'Brien
Offline
Joined: 01/15/2011 - 2:18pm
Hi Butch, I think we have

Hi Butch,

I think we have explained the issue pretty well. In this part of Midcoast Maine, there are a number of groups of coyote hunters who continually hunt with dogs with radio collars. They let them out and they run over miles of private land in pursuit of coyote. The dogs cross private posted and unposted land alike. Because they can't control their dogs, this has led to many ugly exchanges with private landowners and farmers. As the sponsor of this bill, I can say this was not submitted with an "anti-hunting" agenda. It's about private property rights.

jcmcards
Offline
Joined: 01/28/2009 - 1:27pm
Ok...I tried to get into the

Ok...I tried to get into the BDN link but couldn't. But, my instinct was right on the Rep. O'brien, Apondsong link as the sponsor of the bill. My immediate red flag was drawn by Rep. O'Brien's comment about "radio collars"...what has that got to do with anything. So APS has convinced a legislature and 'few' people per the other links folks to jump on the 'save the coyote' band wagon by using 'property rights'. It's another ANTI-HUNTING BILL, PERIOD. Sorry Andy, I don't buy the peace and quiet argument of hounds baying in the distance....why not try again to legislate jet planes and wind mills...It's certainly not hunters which destroy property in my humble opinion....but ATV's and idiots dumping trash. Thanks for raising this bill to my attention. Hopefully, everyone here will contact their reps about another ANTI-HUNTING BILL. Maine has always been open to 'traditional use; and that includes hounds for rabbits, which I didn't see mentioned. Bear? Shades of the old ANTI-HUNTING BILL rearing it's ugly head. Coyotes are finally in the crosshairs with IFW and recognized as a major part of the decline of the deer herd. Let's not let this ANTI-HUNTING BILL go any further.

Snowalker
Offline
Joined: 01/13/2000 - 1:01am
Cards.....it's exactly what

Cards.....it's exactly what it is. They keep coming from every angle they can dream up. Perhaps all hunters should start an anti-organic food protest because of all the live fecal matter that is found in it. It can't be good for rabbits and others like bears as well as humans.Imagine what it must do to the top oppurtunist...the coyote!!! Guess they just want everyone to be as FOS as they are. I guess I'll post my property to all hiking, birdwatching,photography etc...I don't even want passerbys to look in here.
There is a way for these who don't want anyone or anything on their property.....just like in other parts of the US...high fence. That way they can sleep secure in the knowledge that their property is not being invaded and they can sit back by day and enjoy the nothingness of it all. Something they can relate too.

Butch Moore
Offline
Joined: 11/20/1999 - 1:01am
Rep. O'Brien, the

Rep. O'Brien, the anti-hunting agenda I mention has been used elsewhere - limit access and discourage hunting. Is it possible that some of the people who have come to you claim to be okay with deer hunting, but really are trying to get rid of hunting with bait, coyote hunting, or hunting with dogs? Or maybe these people were induced to complain because of anti-hunting friends?

This bill sounds suspiciously like it's targeting the same things that were targeted as part of the infamous anti-bear hunting referendum a few years ago are being targeted now. It sounds like stepping stone legislation to accomplish what the anti-hunters set out to do then but couldn't. They wanted to ban hunting with bait and ban hunting with dogs. Many of the same people who spoke in favor of that anti-hunting bill here on AMG have also spoken out against coyote hunting as well. It's not much of a stretch to connect the two as this is the methodology that has been used in the past: Can't get what you want the first time? Come back for a little at a time! Get it slowly, appear reasonable, and no one will ever know that was your agenda the whole time. *nudge nudge* *wink wink*

That's enough to make anyone who has been paying attention over the years to have reason to question this bill. Since there is already recourse to allow a landowner to stop the things they don't want done on their land, it's hard to imagine that Cecil Gray, Bill Randall, and WAM aren't lurking in the background somewhere with their pals at MFOA and H$U$.

BTW, I notice that this isn't the only bill on this subject with Rep. O'Brien's name on it:

http://www.mainelegislature.org/legis/bills/bills_125th/billtexts/HP0236...

http://www.mainelegislature.org/legis/bills/bills_125th/billtexts/HP0075...

If it looks like a duck... [img]http://www.neoutdoorvoice.com/phpBB2/images/smiles/dunno.gif[/img]

Mr. Magoo
Offline
Joined: 12/16/2008 - 12:27pm
We have 90 mostly wooded

We have 90 mostly wooded acres in the Cumberland area and have allowed hunting by permission for most of the time we have owned the property. I don't hunt myself, but have several close friends that do. The last hunting I did was shooting rats at the North Turner Dump when I was in college! Other than an incident where my oldest daughter was nearly hit by a hunter while walking on our road, we have had no major incidents. The people who hunt on our property identifyed the hunter for us and he was reported to the local police. We allow tree stands to be built. We have cyotes on the property and I have noticed a decline in deer sitings over the past several years, though the turkey and bird population is expanding. I would favor some regulations to make it easier to hunt cyotes including higher bounties. I'm not sure I would go as far as allowing packs of hounds to hunt. Just my own thoughts.

ListenASec
Offline
Joined: 09/18/2002 - 12:01am
We have a 90 acre lot of

We have a 90 acre lot of woodland on a hillside that is surrounded by a lot more undeveloped acreage as well. Hunters have been in general very good about getting permission even though they know we don't mind hunting. There are a couple of groups that hunt with dogs, and I have yet to actually hear or see the dogs, or any evidence of them being there. I raise some sheep and have had alpacas in the past, and the coyotes have been an issue. I have had at least 3 coyote kills, but never have I had a dog from the hunting packs to even come close to the farm areas. The coyote overrun was becoming a problem and I welcome the coyote hunters.
As with anything, you have good people who know what they are doing and are respectful of the land they are borrowing, and you have a-holes who don't care what they are doing, and they usually know the least about what they are doing.

Bigshooter
Offline
Joined: 03/01/2000 - 1:01am
I must be very lucky and

I must be very lucky and maybe even "sheltered" as this is not anything I have ever had to deal with as a hunter, a master guide or a landowner. The only dog I have ever seen on my "back 140" is a happy Golden Retriever sniffing around on one of my game cams. Since I am in Central Maine and this seems to be a Coastal Maine problem, do we really need a "broad brush" approach? I am asking this in complete seriousness.

Watcher
Offline
Joined: 03/23/2008 - 12:32pm
Here is a link to the Ohio

Here is a link to the Ohio form for written permission to hunt on private land. In Michigan you need written permission to hunt within 450 feet of a dwelling or barn or camp etc.

I had some land in Michigan near a large forested area. You don't know how many time a hunter or a hunter and his dog came out of my woods and walked across my back yard to get to the main road. I confronted one of them and he said .."well, you didn't put up a sign saying I could not hunt." I replied that with that reasoning, inasmuch as he does not have a sign on his house saying I am not allowed to enter, then I can use his house all I want. Didn't go over well. My point is, whether my land is posted or not, the hunter has no rights to use my proprty without permission...period.

Hunt

apondsong
Offline
Joined: 02/23/2004 - 1:01am
If a landowner IS

If a landowner IS anti-hunting, should they still not have recourse when packs of dogs are chasing down an animal with the intent to rip it apart on their property; be it a bear, bobcat or coyote?

In this case, it is a matter of property ownership vs. hunting rights. I say the taxpayer, manager, landowner's rights always take precidence.

The people with the dogs can still hunt. They will NOT be able to allow dogs to run where they are not wanted...for whatever reason the landowner has...doesn't matter.

It's an inconvenience for the dog owners. That's the consequence of their "method of choice" for their sport. Sorry. I believe if they had followed the recommendations printed on the front cover of the Maine Hunting & Trapping Laws phamplet....ASK FIRST, this wouldn't even BE an issue ! That..and the IF&W's inability to recognize that the hunting of any larger animal, almost 24/7 might cause some problems down the road for a lot of property owners. Both have some accountability.

Unfortunately, laws need to be written for the few bad apples that continually do the wrong thing...not those that are responsible in the first place. That's why we have stop signs and laws to back them up.

LarryB
Offline
Joined: 02/02/2005 - 1:01am
apondsong, very simply, a

apondsong, very simply, a remedy under the law already exists.

Earl Nickerson . Jr
Offline
Joined: 11/24/2002 - 1:01am
So APS has convinced a

So APS has convinced a legislature and 'few' people per the other links folks to jump on the 'save the coyote' band wagon by using 'property rights'. It's another ANTI-HUNTING BILL, PERIOD.

Indeed...This piece of crap isn't going anywhere...Thank God We have LePage to veto this nonsense if it ever gets that far , but I doubt it will...That dog just won't hunt....

Butch Moore
Offline
Joined: 11/20/1999 - 1:01am
"That..and the IF&W's

"That..and the IF&W's inability to recognize that the hunting of any larger animal, almost 24/7 might cause some problems down the road...

Careful, your anti-hunting roots are showing....

Pages

Log in to post comments