Interesting Iowa DNR Story

[Hoytvectrix]

So this is a baiting debate?

Fry him!

In all honesty, I do think those are similar. Attraction of corn is insane. I think tradition and widely accepted ideas of ethics can legitimately play a role in policy.

Either way, my buddy’s gonna be checking your place out some time next month to make sure everything’s on the up-and-up. You’ll barely know he’s been there. Dont worry — he’s a LEO. ;)

The Supreme Court has ruled several times about the reasonable expectation of privacy. Also, current regulations say that the air above your property is not really yours. I suspect that this will be panned out in court at some point.

I own a small drone that I have been using to document habitat projects. At 400 feet, you can still hear the rotors, but with newer drones and rotors, they can be remarkably quiet. Do we really want to open the can of worms on the chance big brother catches someone breaking the law?

Famous quote attributed to Benjamin Franklin is "those who would sacrifice a little bit of liberty in exchange for security deserve neither". I am a huge fan of this because power given is almost never relinquished.

(I decided to look up the accuracy of the quote above to make sure I was getting it right. Turns out, the original quote by Franklin had a little different meaning, interestingly enough. I think it still applies to this situation, but if you like to read up on these things, you can read more if you're interested here.)

 

[Ben.MN/WI]

The Supreme Court has ruled several times about the reasonable expectation of privacy. Also, current regulations say that the air above your property is not really yours. I suspect that this will be panned out in court at some point.

I own a small drone that I have been using to document habitat projects. At 400 feet, you can still hear the rotors, but with newer drones and rotors, they can be remarkably quiet. Do we really want to open the can of worms on the chance big brother catches someone breaking the law?

Famous quote attributed to Benjamin Franklin is "those who would sacrifice a little bit of liberty in exchange for security deserve neither". I am a huge fan of this because power given is almost never relinquished.

(I decided to look up the accuracy of the quote above to make sure I was getting it right. Turns out, the original quote by Franklin had a little different meaning, interestingly enough. I think it still applies to this situation, but if you like to read up on these things, you can read more if you're interested here.)

I don't see how allowing the DNR to use the same drone that many landowners already have and use on theirs and adjacent properties is giving up anything.

I might have viewed things differently before my poaching neighbor moved in, but now I'd gladly allow the DNR to fly over my properties to check for baiting if they also fly over my neighbor's land. The DNR can already enter private property without permission, so this isn't a major change as far as I'm concerned. Just a more efficient way to catch people breaking the law.

 

[Brian662]

I don't see how allowing the DNR to use the same drone that many landowners already have and use on theirs and adjacent properties is giving up anything.

I might have viewed things differently before my poaching neighbor moved in, but now I'd gladly allow the DNR to fly over my properties to check for baiting if they also fly over my neighbor's land. The DNR can already enter private property without permission, so this isn't a major change as far as I'm concerned. Just a more efficient way to catch people breaking the law.

My privacy rights shouldn't be violated by law enforcement because your neighbor is a poacher much the same way as your 2A rights shouldn't be violated because of a school shooting.

 

[Ben.MN/WI]

My privacy rights shouldn't be violated by law enforcement because your neighbor is a poacher much the same way as your 2A rights shouldn't be violated because of a school shooting.

Comparing flying a drone to a school shooting is a bit much, but I get your point.

My point is that flying a drone or plane with a camera is currently legal so using it to catch criminals should be legal as well.

 

[Hoytvectrix]

I don't see how allowing the DNR to use the same drone that many landowners already have and use on theirs and adjacent properties is giving up anything.

I might have viewed things differently before my poaching neighbor moved in, but now I'd gladly allow the DNR to fly over my properties to check for baiting if they also fly over my neighbor's land. The DNR can already enter private property without permission, so this isn't a major change as far as I'm concerned. Just a more efficient way to catch people breaking the law.

I think the point I poorly made, is that this is a technology that the courts haven't caught up with. Functionally, it is no different than DNR using ultralight planes for catching baiting (which coincidentally has been happening near our property). Sure, it would make their job easier, but I would rather there be a discussion every time a new piece of technology tests what is legal than to assume that just because they can already do it, doesn't mean that it was right to begin with. What is legal or acceptable now is always used to justify further expansion of powers. If anything, we should be constantly trying to reel in what is legal for law enforcement to use.

The interview I linked above is actually more about smartphones and government surveillance, but is very relevant to this discussion. Surely the founding fathers did not anticipate any of this technology. I am anti-authoritarianism to my core. Permission to infringe rights, even in times of emergencies, make me feel uneasy, even if I happen to agree with the people exercising emergency powers.

 

[Brian662]

Comparing flying a drone to a school shooting is a bit much, but I get your point.

My point is that flying a drone or plane with a camera is currently legal so using it to catch criminals should be legal as well.

Right, and I completely understand your point. Like I mentioned in my first reply to this thread it is a very slippery slope to walk, especially when it seems convenient.

 

[SwampCat]

We gave the GW deer hunting rights on our lease

 

[Ben.MN/WI]

I think the point I poorly made, is that this is a technology that the courts haven't caught up with. Functionally, it is no different than DNR using ultralight planes for catching baiting (which coincidentally has been happening near our property). Sure, it would make their job easier, but I would rather there be a discussion every time a new piece of technology tests what is legal than to assume that just because they can already do it, doesn't mean that it was right to begin with. What is legal or acceptable now is always used to justify further expansion of powers. If anything, we should be constantly trying to reel in what is legal for law enforcement to use.

The interview I linked above is actually more about smartphones and government surveillance, but is very relevant to this discussion. Surely the founding fathers did not anticipate any of this technology. I am anti-authoritarianism to my core. Permission to infringe rights, even in times of emergencies, make me feel uneasy, even if I happen to agree with the people exercising emergency powers.

It is definitely a balancing act, but man, I hate poachers.

 

[Howboutthemdawgs]

Until you stop the average Joe from legally flying over my property and thermal scoping every acre, I’m all for the gw doing it too. Make it illegal for both and I’m more on board with the authorities respecting that limit. But…at that point we have to accept we have no game laws on private land.

 

[Westwind]

What is the reference to “The chemical DEET” about?

Feel like I’m not understanding something there.

 

[DRG3]

A Great and very complex topic in my mind. I have strong feelings both ways as I have struggled with and reported poaching activities ,but also strongly oppose government overreach (subjective opinion for sure).

I have problems with evidence that isn’t obtained via a warrant or searches without probable cause.
In general I would lean to the side of not allowing drone flights that don’t have a warrant to be admissible. Too much of a slippery slope. I should be able to assume privacy on my land. This to me outweighs- barley- stopping poachers. Even the ones that live near me. I don’t like to give up any rights and wouldn’t mind seeing some come back. My privacy on my land is fundamental in my opinion.

I understand that currently game wardens in most states can just come on my property without any permission or cause but I’m opposed to that. I think they should have to follow the same rules as police.

And I understand the air above my land isn’t regulated but I do think that’s going to have to be addressed like water has been. Although air is more complex I expect.

This comes down to two things that I feel strongly about which makes it tougher and something I think is going to become a larger issue. Will be interesting to see how it all plays out.

 

[Turkish]

Until you stop the average Joe from legally flying over my property and thermal scoping every acre, I’m all for the gw doing it too. Make it illegal for both and I’m more on board with the authorities respecting that limit. But…at that point we have to accept we have no game laws on private land.

It’s pretty easy for me to admit that I’m against both. Something about 2 wrongs comes to mind.

 

[Bill Loser]

Until you stop the average Joe from legally flying over my property and thermal scoping every acre, I’m all for the gw doing it too. Make it illegal for both and I’m more on board with the authorities respecting that limit. But…at that point we have to accept we have no game laws on private land.

How would that work? Somehow law enforcement now doesn't have the right to walk on any land if they think a law is being broken? That makes no sense

 

[Howboutthemdawgs]

How would that work? Somehow law enforcement now doesn't have the right to walk on any land if they think a law is being broken? That makes no sense

Correct. Gotta get a warrant which how they hell will they do that if they have no idea a law is being broken. So at least in once state the end of game regulations on private land is basically here.

Tennessee Rules Game Wardens Need Warrants for Private Property Investigations

In Tennessee, a recent court ruling restricts the ability of game wardens from the Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency (TWRA) to enter or surveil private property to investigate wildlife crimes without a warrant. The ruling stems from a lawsuit brought on by Terry Rainwaters and Hunter...

www.themeateater.com

 

[swat1018]

The Supreme Court has ruled several times about the reasonable expectation of privacy. Also, current regulations say that the air above your property is not really yours. I suspect that this will be panned out in court at some point.

I own a small drone that I have been using to document habitat projects. At 400 feet, you can still hear the rotors, but with newer drones and rotors, they can be remarkably quiet. Do we really want to open the can of worms on the chance big brother catches someone breaking the law?

Famous quote attributed to Benjamin Franklin is "those who would sacrifice a little bit of liberty in exchange for security deserve neither". I am a huge fan of this because power given is almost never relinquished.

(I decided to look up the accuracy of the quote above to make sure I was getting it right. Turns out, the original quote by Franklin had a little different meaning, interestingly enough. I think it still applies to this situation, but if you like to read up on these things, you can read more if you're interested here.)

The can of worms has been open for years, have you ever seen a police helicopter. The size and shape of the aircraft has changed by airspace and the laws governing it hasn't. The courts have made countless rulings regarding how aircraft can be used in law enforcement actions. There will always be new rulings, usually after someone oversteps the boundaries -- and I'm not saying that can't happen.

 

[T-Max]

Honest question for the entire group. Would anyone’s opinion change if you had a poaching neighbor that you could do nothing about? If all of your habitat work were for naught because the laws can’t be enforced? Wouldn’t we all become poachers then? Could the resource exist in that scenario? Things to ponder.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Howboutthemdawgs]

Honest question for the entire group. Would anyone’s opinion change if you had a poaching neighbor that you could do nothing about? If all of your habitat work were for naught because the laws can’t be enforced? Wouldn’t we all become poachers then? Could the resource exist in that scenario? Things to ponder.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It’s all good till it affects you.

Defund the police…until your house gets broken into

 

[Brian662]

Honest question for the entire group. Would anyone’s opinion change if you had a poaching neighbor that you could do nothing about? If all of your habitat work were for naught because the laws can’t be enforced? Wouldn’t we all become poachers then? Could the resource exist in that scenario? Things to ponder.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Why could you do nothing about it? Wouldn't you alert the authorities and let them do their job within the confines of the law and constitution?

 

[Bill]

Why could you do nothing about it? Wouldn't you alert the authorities and let them do their job within the confines of the law and constitution?

And if you had proof of a baiting or any law breaking neighbor that might become probable cause. I had a neighbor dumb enough to bait close enough to my line that I could see it. The game warden had no problem hopping that fence on opening morning once I showed it to him. Every game warden we get in my county has been given permission to enter my land at any time, literally.

In MO you can't fly a drone over private property. At least the guy that will come and look for your deer can not fly over the neighbors land without permission. My buddy got just that call last season. Neighbors wanted to look for a deer on his place. He said call the drone guy, if he finds it you can go get it. My friend met them on the road and the drone guy wouldn't fly over until he got verbal permission. He found it. Cool video.

I don't think anyone should be droning over my farm without permission. LEO or not. I'd give LEO permission but I should be asked or give permission upfront.

Hoyt, I have to get that guys number. $300 to come out and $100 bonus if he finds the deer.

 

[DRG3]

Why could you do nothing about it? Wouldn't you alert the authorities and let them do their job within the confines of the law and constitution?

I agree with this and have been in this position.

And if you had proof of a baiting or any law breaking neighbor that might become probable cause. I had a neighbor dumb enough to bait close enough to my line that I could see it. The game warden had no problem hopping that fence on opening morning once I showed it to him. Every game warden we get in my county has been given permission to enter my land at any time, literally.

In MO you can't fly a drone over private property. At least the guy that will come and look for your deer can not fly over the neighbors land without permission. My buddy got just that call last season. Neighbors wanted to look for a deer on his place. He said call the drone guy, if he finds it you can go get it. My friend met them on the road and the drone guy wouldn't fly over until he got verbal permission. He found it. Cool video.

I don't think anyone should be droning over my farm without permission. LEO or not. I'd give LEO permission but I should be asked or give permission upfront.

Hoyt, I have to get that guys number. $300 to come out and $100 bonus if he finds the deer.

Great points.