No need to spin it. Here you have it folks - the official GF&P position that is keeping you guys from hunting on our land. We might be a bunch of redneck ranchers, but we're not stupid and allowing hunting to subject our ranches to trespass by GF&P would be incredibly idiotic.
Sorry guys. This has been a lot of fun, but you haven't convinced any of us that hosting hunters again is something we want to do. Do any of you think that by posting excerpts from the opinions that caused us to lock our land to start with is going to change our minds? Dream on!
I'm going to post some URLs for you to further your research. Hopefully by reading these over and attempting to look at this from the landowners perspective (a stretch, I know!) you will be able to understand our problems with GF&P and the Open Fields Doctrine:
First, the Attorney General's opinion. Western SD posted excerpts for this. I will point out two things:
1.This is only Long's opinion, not fact and not a court case.
2.Our opinion and the opinions of our attorneys are diametrically opposed to his opinion and the opinion of GF&P, which incidentally doesn't have any bearing on how landowners conduct our affairs. http://www.state.sd.us/attorney/applications/documents/oneDocument.asp?DocumentID=636
Second, this URL is GF&P's take on the Open Fields Doctrine – "Background Information and Legal Issues Pertaining to the Open Fields Doctrine and Conservation Officers Conducting Compliance Checks on Private Lands". It will come as no surprise to any of you that we disagree.
http://www.sdgfp.info/Wildlife/hunting/Info/OpenFieldsQandA.pdf
Third, I'm posting GF&P's policy requirements for entry onto private land in it's entirety. If this policy was written into law without clause #4 that I've highlighted, the lockout would be over today. I've also posted the URL for you so you can read it all for yourselves:
POLICY REQUIREMENTS RELATED TO ENTRY ONTO PRIVATE LANDS
A. While working in their official capacity, agency employees may not enter private land, without first seeking permission from the landowner or operator, for any purposes other than to make personal contact or gain permission for work related access to private land, with the exceptions listed in Sections B and C below.
B. In situations such as car-deer collisions, where the injured animal is located on private land but near to the road right-of-way, agency employees may enter upon private land without landowner or operator permission in order to humanely dispatch injured or sick wildlife, provided such entry is made on foot. In situations where sick, injured or diseased animals are located a greater distance onto private land, agency employees shall make a reasonable attempt to gain permission from the landowner or operator prior to entering. If the employee is unable to secure permission from the landowner or operator, and the employee is compelled to take more immediate action, they may enter private land and shall notify the landowner/operator of the cause for the entry as soon as possible. Reasonable precautions should be taken so that any use of a motor vehicle on private lands does not cause damage to crops, pastures or other property.
C. Conservation officers and other agency employees, whose duty is the enforcement of the game, fish, parks, boating and criminal laws of this state, shall follow the guidelines offered under the "Open Fields Doctrine", as summarized in Official Opinion Number 04- 01 from the South Dakota Office of the Attorney General, when entering open fields on private land for the purposes of:
1. Investigating reports of crimes and the enforcement of statutes as authorized under SDCL 41-15-10 and SDCL 41-15-10.1;
2. Rendering assistance to other law enforcement agencies in responding to emergencies, accidents, various requests for assistance or other matters pertaining to the protection of public safety;
3. Acting in the performance of his/her duty as a law enforcement officer; and
4. Conducting compliance checks of hunters, trappers, anglers and boaters.
Prior to entering private land to conduct a compliance check, officers must personally observe or be able to reasonably articulate that hunting, fishing, trapping, boating or other such activities regulated by the Department of Game, Fish and Parks are taking place on the property at the time.
http://www.sdgfp.info/Wildlife/hunting/Info/PolicyforEmployeeEntryontoPrivateLands.pdf
More reading for you - this is a copy of the bill I introduced in the 2006. It was taken almost exactly from the bills that were introduced in twice before. It was written by some very good attorneys and does not restrict law enforcement in any way. Read it over and tell me what you think is wrong with it?
HOUSE BILL NO. 1148
Introduced by: Representatives Olson (Betty), Dennert, Engels, Hanks, and Howie and Senators Napoli, Maher, McNenny, and Schmidt (Dennis)
FOR AN ACT ENTITLED, An Act to restrict the entry of conservation officers onto certain private land without permission.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF SOUTH DAKOTA:
Section 1. That chapter 41-2 be amended by adding thereto a NEW SECTION to read as follows:
No conservation officer may, in the course of performing the ordinary duties of a conservation officer, enter any private land unless the conservation officer has the permission of the landowner or the lessee. However, any conservation officer may enter any private land without permission:
(1) If reasonable suspicion or probable cause exists that a violation of a law that the conservation officer is authorized to enforce has been, is being, or is about to be committed;
(2) To investigate a report of illegal hunting, fishing, or trapping activity;
(3) To dispatch crippled or distressed wildlife;
(4) To respond to emergency situations, accidents, or other threats to public safety.
