• The SH Membership has gone live. Only SH Members have access to post in the classifieds. All members can view the classifieds. Starting in 2020 only SH Members will be admitted to the annual hunting contest. Current members will need to follow these steps to upgrade: 1. Click on your username 2. Click on Account upgrades 3. Choose SH Member and purchase.
  • We've been working hard the past few weeks to come up with some big changes to our vendor policies to meet the changing needs of our community. Please see the new vendor rules here: Vendor Access Area Rules

Virgina DWR

MattMan81

MattMan81

Well-Known Member
SH Member
Joined
Jan 13, 2020
Messages
5,017
Location
The Mitten
www.fieldandstream.com

Hunter Sues Virginia DWR Alleging that Game Wardens Illegally Confiscated a Trail Camera From His Private Property

Josh Highlander says three camouflaged game wardens came onto his private property without a warrant and confiscated one of his game cameras.
www.fieldandstream.com www.fieldandstream.com

Not sure how I feel about this. I can side both ways. Guess I need more information. I hope they release more details.
I hate to see law enforcement have their hands tied on things. But also don't like the idea of things going up missing.
If they had really good evidence to be checking these guys out, I guess I'm okay with it. But if they were acting on a tip. Some further investigation should have been needed.
Not sure. Anyone have more legal insight to all this?
 
I suspect, but don't know, it's very suspicious that DWR comes up on your property the exact moment you harvest.

I live in VA and DWR is non existent unless there are reports.

But I'm in SW VA, so patrol may be different.

For me, I would side on DWR because my experience is DWR is not interfering with legal hunting.
 
Maybe I’ve just got a good DNR here in Iowa but I’ve never felt like they’re out to get the folks who follow the laws.
My take reading the article is they “laid out seed for the food plot” a little close to the season, told someone they shouldn’t have, and got found out.
I also don’t get the impression they needed a bird for food to make ends meet so I’m tossing out what sympathy I would have for that situation.
 
boyne bowhunter said:
In a recent "Before the Echo" podcast they had a CO on and he actually said he liked having trail cams in the woods because they often provided him with the evidence he needed to cite them for breaking the rules (i.e. baiting or illegal harvest).
Click to expand...
This is a two sided to the coin thing if ever there was. Cams give him the evidence but if the cams are on private property why can he view and seize them, it’s private, I can do what I want on my land, but deer travel and game is the responsibility of the state and on and on ad absurdum.
 
It’s a pretty slippery slope on either side. What is really needed is some rulings on what is, and is not allowed. I’m not sure I like the idea of GW able to enter my property, and take personal property without a warrant.
 
Did I read thus correctly.
Entering someone's private property without a warrant.
Taking someone's private property without a warrant.

What if the police came into your house and took your computer and cell phone without a warrant?
 
I have often heard, but I am without direct experience thank goodness, the GW here in VA have a lot more “leeway” than LEO.
But then again, I guess this is the basis for the lawsuit, to force a ruling on what is and isn’t acceptable.
 
Wardens commit unconstitutional acts on a daily basis. Per our 4th amendment rights, no search and seizure is permitted without a warrant. There is no except Game Wardens clause. No one has the right to be on private property without landowners permission or a warrant.

I had a GW tell me once about a arrest he made, and it was very upsetting to me…I personally think this case should have gone to higher courts. Long story short, GW puts a cell cam on a piece of private property due to suspected game violations. Land owner and child are walking through the woods when the child needing to use the bathroom unknowingly urinates in front of the camera. The landowner destroys the camera, because he assumes the camera has pictures of his child’s genitalia. Land owner gets charged and found guilty of felony destruction of govt property.

That’s just plain wrong. If there is a cell cam on my property; property I personally pay taxes and I didn’t put it there we are going to have a problem.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Brother's cameras were seized after he was cited.

Who knows what brother disclosed about Plaintiff during that citation, or if there was something incriminating Plaintiff on his brother's cameras (like helping brother spread seed)? Or if LEO's just took it upon themselves to investigate Plaintiff solely on a hunch? We just don't know the specifics.

Also unknown is whether or not LEOs discovered fresh millet in Plaintiff's food plot as well, thereby giving them cause to take plaintiff's trail cameras in the course of their duties.

The details matter here.

But the real battle, and why a NFP firm is taking this on, is all to do about the "Open Fields" case law that allows Wildlife Officers to do what they are doing. It's being challenged in multiple states (is rejected in 4), numerous articles can be found for those interested.

Bottom line is, VDWR isn't shooting from the hip when they state:

"it is lawful for a Virginia game warden to carry out an active investigation on private property without a warrant—or the consent or knowledge of the landowner—so long as those activities are executed “within constitutional bounds.” It is also lawful, she confirmed, for a warden to deploy game cameras on private property, or to seize game cameras off of private property during an investigation—again, as long as it’s done “within constitutional bounds.”
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top