Claiming PRIVATE when public???

[ZEEK1223]

with a frozen lake, how could one ever Distinguish cattails that are in the water, or cattails that are on private land. I would say that cattails can only grow in water, so can hunters walk all the way into shore where the cattails end? are all cattails public land? Where will the debate end?

[BobT]

To make the water open for public I have always been told that you need to be able to float a canoe in it and have access from a road.

I don't believe the road access is necessary however, it would not be legal to trespass across private property to gain access. A land-owner can't own a lake but can own all the land around a lake. I believe that if there is an inlet or outlet you are legally able to use it as a means of access because they too are public waterways.

Bob

[CJH]

I believe it has to be big enough and sustained to be considered public water. As mentioned above, you cannot cross private property to access it. There is tons of gray area.

I believe wetlands are even grayer, with public usage defined differently than how the wetlands are.

[skiinglady]

Here's another interesting tidbit for your consideration. The usual and customary way to determine the Ordinary High Water (OHW) line is where the cattails turn to grass. If you are standing in cattails, and you got there legally, you are standing in public water if some of the adjacent water is large enough to float a canoe.

[BLACKJACK]

Its still a slippery slope. I hunted a small lake last week, when I cut up thru the cattails, the 'high water mark' ended up in someones cow pasture, you could see where the cows had been wading into the cattails, they were beat down and sporadic. Of course thats where I saw the pheasant tracks but I'm sure Mr. Farmer wouldn't have been happy to have me hunting in his cow pasture early in the season! My rule of thumb is to stay on the water edge of the cattails and only hunt sloughs where duck hunters have also launched their boats. That way the shore line owner is used to hunters on his shoreline.

[Phil_Haley]

Minnesota does not use the high water mark rule.

Minnesota uses the current waters edge rule.

Example: If you own property adjacent to a lake

and the lake level rises 2 feet and your lake shore shrinks

you lose that land with no compensation. But if the lake level drops or a solid mat of cattails grows then you gain that land, you also get to pay property taxes on that gained land and have no control over that wetland other than to prohibit trespass.

If you can walk on them (cattails), even if you sink into them then it is land (wetland). If you can float a canoe in them it gets iffy. The more water the safer you are, the less water then you will be a trespasser.

The only safe cattails are next to public land (solid land).

I have escorted people out of cattails, some at gunpoint.

Signs were posted every 20 feet and they still trespassed.

A person could walk out to the waters edge which was a good 50 yards from solid land; yes you could sink in at times. All this was private land owned by my boss, he paid property taxes on this and the property line as recorded with the county was at the waters edge (edge of the cattails). I had permission to hunt it and orders to evict all others. Some got nasty but could not argue with a double barrel and two triggers that could be pulled at once. Unload and leave, refusal was not an option. When they got out they were arrested by the local CO.

As for that land owner he may have owned those cattails, I don't know. If he owned the land on both sides of that body of water he may have. But it is your responsibility to check ownership of land including wetland before you hunt it. Don't assume that cattails are public property. You may get a nasty surprise, with the loss of your guns to the local game warden. Plus a little jail time.

Don't give hunters a bad name check property ownership before you hunt.

[chub]

Does not apply if your walking on ice.

Good luck on your threatening people with your double barrel shotgun gig.

[BLACKJACK]

Good luck on your threatening people with your double barrel shotgun gig.

My exact thoughts. If he didn't call the sheriff, I would. Trespassing is one thing but threatening with a gun is totally different matter. Plus the guy you're threatening has a gun... A simple tresspassing violation could escalate into a deadly situation in a hurry! Then somebody would be facing some serious jail time. Not worth it.

[sparcebag]

If the body of water can float a canoe its public you can gain access if a road right of way abuts this water,a creek can be walked on or paddled to gain access,finally as long as there is water its public,also if you gain access by permission the whole body of water catails included is public.

[Basseyes]

Pointing a loaded weapon at someone and threatening them with deadly force over a trespass dispute is one of the most aggressive things I've ever heard of and will likely only lead to more and greater problems than trespassing. Even more so when you are not the land owner and just trying to protect hunting rights to the edge of the water line and some cattails that may or may not be public. Most judges are not going to give a pass because of property rights unless you are acting in self defense, which I doubt was the case when a threat is made with a loaded weapon. Common sense has to be used by both sides. There's got to be respect for others. Be it the public and their right to use public property or a land owners right to keep the public off theirs. There's also ethical questions about pushing the envelope. Point being if you build a house close to the border of a piece of public ground you knew was there first then expect not to have people hunting right out your back door a little thought on your part would have gone a long way to keep your frustration levels way down. On the other hand if there's a house on a border don't shoot towards it and be aware that it's there and use some common courtesy. With more and more habitat getting developed and divided up this problem is only going to increase as more hunters are packed into smaller blocks of public land and hunters owning postage sized stamps of land whos borders can be crossed inadvertently or not. All that being said I would never access a lake from a right of way and hunt the cattails around it knowing full well I'm going to run into nothing but problems with land owners. Life's to short to invite problems like that. Plus there's plenty of areas with good pheasant numbers on public land in the SW part of the state that the drive would be well worth it over going out looking for trouble.

[fisherjmb]

This is exactly why I quit pheasant hunting. Between angry landowners yelling at you or worse pointing a loaded gun at you telling you to get off their land, and not even being able to gain access to private land because every single landowner says "no", then all you have left is public land which is sparse and is hunted every day multiple times a day, I figure what's the point. I would rather go fishing than deal with that hassle.

[harvey lee]

One can read into the laws any way they see fit but that does not make it legal. Many times I have not hunted a spot simply because it was a questionable location or I need to read into the law to favor me.

This is also why hunters get a bad name just like landowners. I have to believe that one day if everyone followed the rules as written, we would all be better off including the hunter.

We also have to remember that these laws were put into place due to the fact that so many people hunting did whatever they wanted and didn't care what the landowner believed. Now we have many laws in place and we don't care for them either.

[Phil_Haley]

Wow I hit the spot!

One be careful in your assumtions. Two like I said over water you are ok. Also when I encountered them they got threatening

with their shotguns. I had told them they were treaspassing and to leave they refused and lowered their shotguns at me, i was alone. I commited a lawfull act of self defense, and will do it again if I have to.

Remember I said those guys where placed under arrest and charged with criminal treaspass. They also lost their shotguns over the incident. If you have questions about the land you are hunting on then check with the county as to ownership before you hunt. the DNR even says to do this.

If you don't then you are only asking for trouble.

If you do then you can defend against the land owner who falsly claims ownership. Some will claim to own it just to keep hunters away. I have encountered this, but in my emloyers case he had proof as to his claim to ownership (county documents). Also those criminals crossed a park reserve and a farmers land with out permission. They were not even allowed to posses firearms on the park reserve. They could only be charged with treaspass on my employers land due to the fact that is where they were caught. This happened back in the 80s. Now all those cattails are owned by the park reserve. A great pheasant spot was lost. As for my hunting now I get platt books and find all public land. I verify ownership before I hunt it. Do you? Or do you assume? Don't assume! Verify before you hunt! go to the Minnesota book store for platt books.

you should be able to find the link on the DNR web site.

For more detailed property lines see the county you hunt.

[walleyeman1]

How do you float a canoe or boat on ice!

[Caleb S]

In this situation lets say the hunters were trespassing. You go down there and they get agressive towards you. The only sane thing to do at this time is to leave and call the CO, not raise your gun and let the stand off begin.

Besides, I can't imagine you approached the hunters in a polite manner and explained they were on private property and whammo, they pull their guns on you. Come on now, obviously both parties played a part in this escalating to this point and it could have been avoided. A simple call to the CO and you get the same result without people pointing guns at each other.

[Dave S]

Wow I hit the spot!

One be careful in your assumtions. Two like I said over water you are ok. Also when I encountered them they got threatening

with their shotguns. I had told them they were treaspassing and to leave they refused and lowered their shotguns at me, i was alone. I commited a lawfull act of self defense, and will do it again if I have to.

Bottom line is, you should never have to do this. If you witness a trespass violation, call law enforcement and let them deal with it. This is not the situation for vigilante justice.

[DuckDog]

Wow! Phil - you say do not give hunters a bad name but you lower your shotgun to them? Where are you hunting so I stay clear? Just walk away! Anyone remember the Wisconsin incident

[ETH310]

A little piece of advice for the tuff guy with the double barrel. Be carefull! Someday you may run into someone as moronic as you and you'll be picking 3 shot out of rear or worse when you pull your double out. There's alot of crazies out there. As far as the cattails go, if there's legal access and ice in the cattails, i'm hunting them and i'm not leaving unless told to do so by a L.E.O.

[DuckDog]

Some people on here amaze me - really worth getting into a potentially deadly encounter over a bird or a deer? Now if it was a case of beer then I could see it

[Dave S]

Another thing to point out is Phil went out there "ARMED". Who's to say the hunters didn't feel threatened. There's always 2 sides to every story and we've only heard one.

[sparcebag]

Fight or flight instinct? Cornered by a crazy pointing a firearm & threatening could mean fight (no where to run)for flight,Sounds like a trip to the moruge for phil!

If your gonna point it and at other armed people? Well he's lucky it wasn't some vet from Nam or Iraq,Afgan. taught to shoot first to save you & your buddies,There'd be only one sided story to tell!

[Phil_Haley]

Note from admin, please read forum policy before posting again, thank you.

[sparcebag]

I dont support trespass. I just dont support your egotistic methods!

[Dave S]

Back in the 80s there were no cell phones to call with.

When those criminals where brought to the road the police

were called and they were arested.

No cell phones and yet the police were called when they were brought to the road? So in other words someone had time to get to a land-line, call the cops, puff out their chest and confront the indivduals with a shotgun?

[chub]

I was in a wild confrontation in a road ditch many years ago. If the guy would have pointed a gun at me, instead of poking his finger in chest and screaming in my face, things would probably have been more severe than a head full of knots for the unhappy land owner.

Phil, you need to relax. I have grave doubts that if you really did have to march someone off at gunpoint(doubtful), things would turn out so well for you a second time. The right guy would either wrap the barrel around your neck, or, you would more than likely be arrested. I also doubt the morons target shooting in the WMA were arrested. Ticketed maybe, but unless they had something else going on, I find it hard to believe, arrested.

I don't support trespass, but if the land is properly posted, the law is there to handle it in a legal manner. I've been yelled at and threatend by a few "landowners", that owned an acre with a mobile home on it 50 miles away, a strip of land 100 yards behind me through the water and cattails, the ditch, the road, and a 40 on the moon. Tell me to leave and odds are I will. Unless I know you're a fool that don't own anything. Then I'll offer to call the law for you, or defend myself.