Hi Fella's........
I just got home and happened to see this schit storm that got started and thought I'd better get my two cents in here before someone shows up at my door with a hangman's noose.
First of all I'd like to state for the record that trespassing on posted land is
WRONG and should not be tolerated under any circumstances!
And yes I also agree that technically if one trespasses on someone's land for the purpose of taking game this can be viewed as a form of poaching.
However........and it's a big however......I do believe that this issue is not as black and white as some would like it to be and............ because this is a hunting
Forum, it's exactly the place where topics like this should be discussed and if need be, strongly debated.
Since much of the fury here seems to be centered around what a landowner's rights are, let's get right to it!
Of course every landowner has the
right to prohibit others from using his land.
But is it "right" in all cases for him to do so?
For example, if someone owns a hundred acres of vacant and unused property and he is approached by a responsible person who politely asks to hunt there and is willing to provide him with their name, address and other landowner references................. he has the
right to approve or deny the request of course, but is he "right" to do so?
If a landowner gets a crop damage permit from the state to kill deer that are damaging his crops, he has the
right to kill as many as he wants, but is he "right" in denying hunters permission to do the same?
If a landowner get a special tax exemption from the state to set aside a portion of his land for conservation purposes, it's his
right to prohibit hunting on this property, but is he "right" in barring hunters that may be subsidizing his tax credit from using the land?
If hunters work their butts off (and pay through licensing fees) to re-introduce various game species into the wild (i.e. turkeys, ducks, grouse, elk etc.), the landowner has the
right to prohibit hunters from taking these animals on his land, but is he "right" in doing so?
I could go on and on, but I hope you can see my point about the difference between the
right to do something and doing the "right" thing.
It's apparent that I did a lousy job getting this point across in my now famous "Robin Hood" post and you guy's certainly kicked my azz for it.
Holy schit!
But my intent was simply to express the outright frustration felt by many hunters when they try to act responsibly and they are routinely denied access to land without ever receiving even the slightest explanation for why this action was taken.
The landowner has the
right to do this of course...............but is he "right" in doing it?
You guys can be the judge of that!
I'm sure you'll promptly inform me of your decision...
