« Ask the Edwards Campaign A Question | Main | South Dakota Considers Special Landowner Licenses »

January 24, 2008

This page has been moved to http://www.fieldandstream.com/blogs/field-notes

If your browser doesn’t redirect you to the new location, please visit The Field Notes at its new location: www.fieldandstream.com/blogs/field-notes.

Discussion Topic: On High-Fence Hunting in Colorado

According to this NRA press release, proposed Colorado House Bill 1096 would:

[E]nd all hunting behind "enclosures" in Colorado. Under the far-reaching and vague bill, every piece of fenced property would be off-limits to hunting, no matter how large the enclosure. As written, it could preclude a farmer or rancher who fences his or her property from allowing anyone, including family or friends to hunt, regardless of the size of the property.

The bill itself reads:
IT IS UNLAWFUL FOR A PERSON TO OFFER ANOTHER PERSON THE OPPORTUNITY TO HUNT, WOUND, OR TAKE ANY MAMMAL THAT IS:
(a) INTENTIONALLY CONFINED IN AN ENCLOSURE, REGARDLESS OF THE SIZE OF THE ENCLOSURE; OR
(b) INTENTIONALLY TIED, STAKED, CAGED, OR OTHERWISE RESTRAINED FROM ENGAGING IN NORMAL MOVEMENT.

What do you think? Does this bill overreach? Would you support any bill restricting high-fence hunting?

Comments

Mike Diehl

"The only people that seem to be upset about this subject are, well.... YOU!"

What? About leasing and the loss of publically huntable land? Maintaining access in the face of posted land & leasing has been the subject of several F&S articles and is prominantly mentioned in the Field Notes blog on the proposed changes to the South Dakota permit tag rules. If I remember right, the same problem of access has recently cropped up in American Hunter as well.

Natcherly, I could of course be completely wrong in imagining that there will come trouble of the trend. Like I said, in the near and foresaable future I'll have huntable land too. And I don't lack for access now to good public land. I just see a bad trend here.

"That makes you, at this point, the minority"

Agreed.

Don't lose sleep over it Bubba. I have *a lot* of sympathy for your pov and I'm not saying that today I can see any reason to step on your or any other landowner's toes. I'm just saying I see a version of the future where things get really messed up.

I could be wrong. Like I said, if I wind up deciding to post my land and don't no adverse consequences come of that, I'll be the first to come to the F&S blogs and say you were right!

No hard feelings (I hope). If nothing else this has been an interesting exercise in thinking about the issues and their implications. Thanks for your time.

Mike Diehl

I'm pretty much convinced Bubba that you are right. I see no reason at this time to advocate for any particular change that may infringe on private landowner hunting privileges.

Because of that, I can see no reason to ban or curtail high-fence operations or game farms. They have as much right to restrict access to anything on their land as anyone else.

YooperJack

Hey Bubba and Mike
You know, it kind of hit me that we're probably discussing nothing. Somebody above, from Texas, mentioned that there isn't any public hunting land down there. Up here there's more than anyone could ever see! Maybe this argument is a lot more site specific than any of us realize.
In any event, I believe that if you can afford your own land, fine. If you can't, hopefully there's public hunting land fairly close. If there isn't, you're in my prayers!
YJ

Mike Diehl

That's a good sentiment Yoop.

I don't know why I got so worked over this. Either my long term view is wrong and I got nothing to worry about or it's right and someone other than me will see it coming. Either way, I was getting my nose out of joint worrying about people I don't know who may have a problem that I won't have.

It was an interesting thought exercise & nothing more.

YooperJack

Actually Mike, you brought up an interesting concept. I'd never thought about that idea before and had never seen anything written about it. While I don't agree with the concept of public deer on private land, I'm sure we'll be faced with this somewhere down the road.

My big "thing" is to encourage more of our young people to hunt and fish. I want them to enjoy these sports and to continue to participate.

BTW, I used to work as a forester on a very large club. This club was started, probably in the 1870's as a hunting club for the very elite. You couldn't hunt on this club but there was a navigable river (public thouroughfare) with excellent trout fishing, that was publicly accessable. The guards used to patrol the banks and if a non-club fisherman was found, they would throw rocks and sticks in the river to spook the fish.

I didn't agree with it then. Its illegal now.
YJ

Bubba

Though not large, there are Nat'l Forests in Texas. There are numerous WMA's that allow hunting though access is restricted either by drawing or "first-come" basis. They also have a multitude of what they used to call (when I lived in Texas) Type II areas. These were by drawing or first-come basis also, I think. Seems some of them were like "Buy a Spot!" For a sum, usually nominal, you were assigned a specific area to hunt! I don't remember all the ins and outs, but Texas does have hunting opportunities for "land"-less people!
Sam Houston Nat'l Forest
Davy Crockett Nat'l Forest
LBJ Nat'l Grasslands
The Big Thickett
These are besides the papermill lands in East Texas that are available to the public.
Papermill lands used to be wide open. Over the years, they have closed them but have begun to allow limited access. Once again, haven't checked into it in many years!

Bubba

GREG

I think I under stand Mike's pov finally. My apologies for being a bit hard headed (defense mechanism). I can also see it happening but not in our or our childrens life time. I think individual rights are to important in this country at this time at a basic level. I'm not trying to get into immigration or anything like that just this topic specifically. After some spirited debate I think we are all on the same page!

Bubba

Oh my Gawd GERG,

You siding with Mike D now?
Thought you wuz my BFAM?

Bubba

GREG

I think we have beat up poor ole Mike enough for this one!!LOL

Mitch

A real nerve has been hit on this subject. Comments should be sent to the proposed law's creator and sponsor for clarification. Nothing as useless as chewing on a piece of mud. Too many people like to argue with out knowing the facts.
A lot of thought and good ideas have been put out here and need to be addressed

Bubba

What ideas are those Mitch?

Bubba




Our Blogs



Syndicate