Newbie? Road hunting Pheasant's in MN, legal or not?

[hanso612]

I want to make it clear that I am not advocating driving around in a truck until you see a pheasant then choosing to hunt. What I am pushing is map of legal ditches where on could park safely away from intersections, farm equipment, livestock,and homesteads-then walk the ditch and shoot birdsfrom the ditch not the private land. Thanks, Hans.

[ScoutII]

How many times are you going to see your game run or fly in or above the ditch? If the right of way is only about 33 feet from the center of the road, pretty NARROW corridor. How many animals fly or run parallel with the roadway? Almost all the time you will be shooting over the road or the animal will be on or over private property when you shoot. Now doesn't that leave you with impression that you are not likeley to be able to shoot and retrieve the animal and not have to leave the narrow corridor of the ditch to do all of this? A snowmobile or atv can usaully predict the outcomes of thier activity, but when a person is hunting the only thing you can control is what you are doing , not what the game may do.

Shouldn't people be looking at road ditches as mini wildlife refuges and not as a place where we can get the last of the critters that got away from us? I would be in favor of making road ditches off limits to hunting simply because I do not see how a person can hunt a road ditch without permission from the land-owner next to the roadway, because odds are the hunter will be on privite property during said hunt whether intentional or not. Just tooo narrow a corridor to work in!

This might be a stretch, but wouldn't shooting across someones property be also considered a tresspass of that property?

[hanso612]

In Minnesota it is legal to shoot across township roads for small game only. My understanding is that one is able to shoot at small game in the air over private property. Duck hunters do it all the time on my propery next to a WMA. Looking back over these threads it is clear that there is much confusion over this issue. And I assume those of us who have time to do research and blog on forums are the more knowledgable hunters. The South Dakota regulations are infinately more clear. I don't believe our farm practices are that much different in the farm belt. I think we are doing all hunters and landowners a disservice by not making it clear which ditches are huntable easments and which are not. I already know of vulunteers willing to do the research. I would rather spend my time hunting and force the legislature to take a stand.

If you've never tried hunting a ditch next to freshly combined corn you are really missing out. One guy in a ditch with a good dog is safer and way more effective than an army in a huge block of CRP. Hans

[Jameson]

 Originally Posted By: hanso612

...one is able to shoot at small game in the air over private property...

I've always thought that it was illegal to shoot(for any reason) over another person's private property-with out permission.

Also, page 12 of '07 regs state:

- A person may not take a wild animal on any land where the person is prohibited from lawfully entering.

I guess it doesn't state "in any AIR," anyone know?

[ScoutII]

So if you shoot a bird over private property isn't your intent to retrieve the bird? So isn't that the same as hunting the property? The property access exeption page 13:{A person on foot may, without perrmission, enter land that is not posted to retrieve a wounded animal that was lawfully shot, but may not remain on the land after being told to leave.}

Key word here I believe is LAWFULLY shot. Now just because duck hunters, as you say, shoot birds over your property all the time does not mean that it is legal. Most WMA are more than 33 feet wide, so I know the hunters shouldn't need to be shooting out of the perimeter line.

I think a lot of people here are missing the basic point here, that hunting areas should be large enough to contain the results of the activity. In other words, your projectiles are not invading someone elses safe zone. If I am on my property, in my safe zone, I should not have to worry that I may be struck by a bullet or shot from a hunter.

I have never seen an exception that allows a person to shoot across an improved roadway, maybe we can clear that point up and work from there.

Now the restriction on page 12:{On another person's private land or a puplic right-of-way, a person may not take a wild animal with a firearm within 500 feet of a building occupied by humans or livestock without written permission.} Isn't WRITTEN PERMISSION the key point here? And public right-of-way does not nessasarily mean a road ditch it may mean a drainage ditch right-of-way.

[hanso612]

Many duck hunters float small rivers in canoes and hunt ducks adjacent to private property. Almost all birds land on private shoreline. In farm country many hunters hunt fence rows and property lines-often the only cover on the landscape. It is a very common practice to shoot at deer on either side of the property line and even if one strictly held their shooting to only those animals clearly on one's own side of the line -very rarely does the deer run toward the shooter and almost always dies on the neighbors property. With archery and mussle loading this is more likely.

My point has never been to hunt within 500 feet of houses or livestock. My point has always been that there are ditches where the easment was purchased by the county outrite and these ditches should be easily identifiable and the rules to hunt them should be clearly stated. I am also pushing for the the rest of the ditches (not in areas where it is clearly defined as illegal to discharge a firearm) to be clasified as public to avoid confusion and allow fair use among the berry pickers, wild asperagis and horseradish collecters, snowmobilers and ATV riders, farmers and hunters. I know it is a very controversial subject. One thing that continues to be clear is there is massive confusion over the details of this issue. Interpretation often is divided along the lines of haves and have nots- and there is no clear guidance from above. I also know if we don't secure large areas of set aside urban sprawl will ultimately win out, and our children -and only the rich ones -will be relegated to canned hunts. Hans

[Jameson]

 Originally Posted By: hanso612

...My point has always been that there are ditches where the easment was purchased by the county outrite...

When a county purchases an easement on land they DO NOT own that land outright. With an easement purchase the county has purchased the right from the landowner to do only certain things on the landowners property. Usually the things done on the land are vehicle traffic, and water ditches. This does not allow for outright public use of the land. I would think most counties have maps of county owned land.

I think the rules to hunt ditches is clearly stated. If you don't own it, ask permission from who does. If you aren't sure who owns it, then don't hunt it.

[ScoutII]

You will end up checking county land records for each parcel of land individually. The only way to find out if the land under a road or the land next to the road is public owned is to go to each county records office for each road you want to know about. Alot of work to search land records back to the first land owners of each parcel, basically doing title seaches.

Not very many houses or animal shelters right next to small rivers when compared to homes and loafing sheds next to roads. I think it has to do with flood planes.

When an animal is legally shot on a neighbors property and happens to cross the line to expire, it is very seldom a problem to legally retrieve the animal. It is ussually a good idea not to be carrying a loaded weapon during the retrieval. Respect of other peoples rights is important when engaged in such acctivities. Agree? One reason being you are really hoping someone will allow you to complete your hunt. The other party you need permission from has no legal obligation to allow your entrance just because you tell them they have to. They have rights too.

So if you get permision to hunt private land you seem to believe that it is all right to hunt ALL the lands that surround that property also? Permission from other owrners or not just because you want to? What if the other neighbor's also hunt the day you are hunting? Just because someone may believe something to be common practice doesn't mean it is LEGAL.

I am still wondering where in the rules that it states it is LEGAL to shoot across Township roads in Minnesta? I have asked the question and local Board members have never heard of such an exception. Now a logging road in Northern Minnesta I can see. Very low population density areas it may be allowed, but I do not see it happening anywhere within an hour drive of a more major metropolitan area.

I was also curious if there is some particular reason you live next to a WMA area and want to be hunting road right-of-ways? Other than you believe right-of-ways are more productive and easier to hunt.

[ScoutII]

Very well put, and seams to hit the nail on the head.

[hanso612]

Scout, you make some very good points. Respecting private property is of the utmost importance. If given the opportunity one should always ask. My family purchased property adjacent to a WMA with no upland cover. Until the slew is frozen over it is impossible to walk all the way around the WMA without going on private property. During deer season I sit and watch, hunting party after hunting party, tresspass. So when the opportunity came up to buy hunting land-I don't live on the land- I jumped at the opportunity to add 22 Acres of CRP to buffer the slew. I hate no tresspassing signs but was forced to put them up after my land began to get pounded. I called the warden during deer season as a group of hunters not only lined up a drive across my property but dropped posters of on the corners all with no cased loaded guns and proceeded to us the truck to drive over my farm in concentric circles. The co responsed by saying it's "

really more of a roundup down here" I sit in a camo ground blind and have slob hunters shoot at deer feet from me. Last year I had a hunter crawl on his belly dressed all in black across tilled soil to shoot at a buck on our side of the fence. I also had duck hunters dive a boat across private property into the WMA and use their engine to run the boat onto the ice then jump up and down until the ice broke. They continued this usless pursuit most of the morning.I offered up the use of my ground blind to the Co during mussle loading season but got no takers.

You ask why I want to hunt ditches-I think it is like when the speed limit was 55 and everyone was safely driving 65. You looked like a fool and were often given the finger if you drove 55. In Southwestern MN there is still a large population of ditch hunters who are convinced that it is legal and encouraged. I just don't want to play the fool. Rather than do like the rest of the crowd and hope that it is legal or that I won't get caught, I hope to get some clarification on the rule.

Near as I can tell roughly 2 percent of ditches in rural Dakota Co. are public-If that number holds true across the state it would dwarf the WMA acreage. Even with the large number of WMA's in our area opening weekend is packed on public land. Big public additions are expensive and will do little to provide more space. Many small parcells would help more, and thats just what labeling the public ditches will do.

I push this issue because if dictch hunting is made clearly illegal I win- but many uninfranchised hunters lose. If it is legal I give up a little private land and many others benifit. I jus want to be remembered as a landowner that fought for the masses once I got my own piece- not the other way around.

[ScoutII]

One thing I still here from local hunters is, "I always was able to hunt there before."The one thing we all need to think of is that the land areas have not increased, but the hunter population has increased. Game is losing habitat to development, and are adapting the best they can to survive.

Hunters are the predators most species must fear now.So yes the game will learn what or who to avoid if they get the chance. One reason the DNR has bag limits is so hunters can learn to SHARE in the bounty and hopefuly not hoard limit on top of limit of game. That way other hunters also might get a chance at their share per say. We need to use what resources we have left wisely, not just look at what we can PLUNDER next.

GOOD discussions is what it will take to make SMART decisions for the future of hunting.

If the affective KILL range of you weapon is 30 yards(150 feet), shouldn't the smallest dimension of a field be at least equal to or greater than that lenght?

[hanso612]

Scout, in Murray Co there are many small WMA's most of them untillable land and small ponds with very litttle upland cover. If forced to only shoot inward we would often be shooting each other or dropping pheasants over water, deep in cattails,or on thin ice. Most good pheasant hunters drive pheasants toward natural blocks-field edges, roads etc. Most pheasant run toward the end of good cover then flush often at the fenceline or road. If the airspace over adjacent land is off limits most of these WMA's are unhuntable. With public land in the pheasant range so limited as a hunter(even if you are landowner) you should be able to see how important it is to fight for our rights to shoot over section roads and fencelines into airspace over private property. Join us in our fight to buffer existing WMA's

The biggest hurdle I see in making new hunting opportunities is fighting the counties fear of lost tax revinue. Murray Co has bitten the bullet and appears to value the multiplier effect hunting brings to the area-many new areas in the last few years. I challenge other counties, especially Rock to try to match Murray in the number of WMA's. Taking these pieces off the tax roles all toghether is one way to get everyone to pay for these natural areas we ALL benifit from.

[ScoutII]

Let us see, on the PRIM map I have, it shows only 1 WMA that has only 9AC, in Murry Co. Alot of WMA listed contain 30-80 Ac.

HUNT: to pursue for food or in sport, to try to find or seek, to drive or chase ;esp. by harrying, to traverse in the search of prey.

HARRY: pillage, to torment by or as if by constant attack. syn. worry, annoy, plauge, pester.

I see 1 WMA area in Grant Co. near Herman,MN listing 0 Ac.And I see another few that list 2-5 Ac elswere in the state. Pretty obvious safe hunting is not going to happen on these parcels. I even see 2 gravel pits listed elsewhere in the state.

Does it make any sense try and book a party of 20 at restaurant that can only seat 12? Do a little home work here.

I sure hope that our elected officials never deem it safe to shoot across a roadway. If a bird finds a way to dodge me using a roadway, it has EARNED its FREEDOM.

The way I read what you are asking for, you will be disrespecting others rights to obtain your goal. What have we gained, by alienating our neighbors?

We need to be better stewards of what we do have.Build good relationships with our neighbors and we will get access to more areas. Work with the DNR to fund more purchases of land for WMA's.

Hunting is not an activity that can safely be done where other activities take place. Hunting to be done safely takes alot of concentration and focus, just ask the Vice President.

As I remember a statement of one person JFK: Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country.

Good luck with your hunting in the future. I hope you can find enough land to HUNT on, finding enough birds to SHOOT at is the real challenge.

[_FearNoFish4:20_]

road hunting can be a lot of fun there is no doubt about that! depending on the situation a lot more sucessful than pushing cover!

[Tom7227]

97B.055 DISCHARGING FIREARMS AND BOWS AND ARROWS.

Subdivision 1. Restrictions related to highways. (a) A person may not discharge a firearm

or an arrow from a bow on, over, or across an improved public highway at a big game animal. A

person may not discharge a firearm or bow and arrow within the right-of-way of an improved

public highway at a big game animal. The commissioner may by rule extend the application of

this subdivision to the taking of migratory waterfowl in designated locations.

( A person may not discharge a firearm or an arrow from a bow on, over, across, or within

the right-of-way of an improved public highway at a decoy of a big game animal that has been

set out by a licensed peace officer.

[Jameson]

 Originally Posted By: Tom7227

97B.055 DISCHARGING FIREARMS AND BOWS AND ARROWS.

Subdivision 1. Restrictions related to highways. (a) A person may not discharge a firearm

or an arrow from a bow on, over, or across an improved public highway at a big game animal. A

person may not discharge a firearm or bow and arrow within the right-of-way of an improved

public highway at a big game animal. The commissioner may by rule extend the application of

this subdivision to the taking of migratory waterfowl in designated locations.

( A person may not discharge a firearm or an arrow from a bow on, over, across, or within

the right-of-way of an improved public highway at a decoy of a big game animal that has been

set out by a licensed peace officer.

This is great info....pertaining to big game ONLY. Different rules for small game.

[Hammer Handle]

If the law is too confusing, I propose the opposite...make ALL road hunting illegal.

I was nearly shot by a turkey hunter road hunting last year. I had already shot my turkey, but was sitting in a deer stand at the end of our woods near a road calling them in to take pictures. A road hunter drives up...uncases his gun...and shoots at the flying turkey. I dove out of the stand as BBs hit all around me. I yelled and he took off. And, my ditch is illegal to hunt, drive in with a snowmobile, pick berries, etc. And you want to make this legal? I was stupid and didn't take a picture of the truck. I will know next time.

Shooting game across the property line is illegal. It is trespassing. If you hit it on your side and it runs over, you can retrieve it with no firearm. Even if wounded, once it crosses the line you CANNOT shoot. You MUST get permission first. If flight, I think the rule applies. I don't see it in black and white, but I am sure this has to apply. I will have to check....

hanso612, sounds like you have some terrible and unsafe neighbors and experiences. I feel for you. My neighbors are fantastic. It is the "other" people we have to watch for.

I should have the right to walk anywhere on my land and feel safe, no matter if it is hunting season or not. I also pay taxes on the ditch and the acreage of the road on my land. If they wish to change this law...they better find some other place to build this road. Hunters need to educate themselves on the law. If they don't, be prepared to pay the fine if caught. And, if your CO did nothing for something that was illegal...I would sure make a stink about that.

[hanso612]

Hammer Handle, I think you possition on this issue is easily argued for. I could live with an all out ban, but I think you are missing the point. Some ditches are owned outright by the county and are public in all legal senses of the word. We had a corner of our farm in Lake Wilson taken through immenent domain to round a corner. We had no choice but to accept the less than market value of the land and no longer pay taxes on it. This land is open to the public. It is just very difficult to tell what pieces belong to the people and those that are just easments.

I too have great neighbors, and helped on two ocassions this year as youngsters harvested their first deer from fenclines along our properties.(incidently they hunted on chisel plowed ground with the hope deer would come out of my CRP, but thats another issue.) People with land have very little reason to push the limits of the law, but the vast majority of people can bearly afford a house and to send their kids to college, let alone, buy their own piece of hunting land. As landowners if we fail to help the city kids find the outdoors by providing a place for them to hunt, they will undoubtedly be doing other things much worse(meth labs, dumping toxic trash) on our open land. Hunters brought up right are stewards of the land and have a vested interest in it.

The reason I started this push was, like hammer handle, I had three close calls hunting in a camo ground blind own my own property. I think if hunters where given the oppurtuntity to hunt ditches next to agriculural land they would be less likely to shoot at us in our woodlots and CRP fields. As it is now this is the only cover down in the section grid. Farmers could be incented to plant cover in ditches away from the homestead and mow within 500 feet.

My mind is not made up on this issue and I value input from all sides. I just hope I don't stir up alot of slob hunting stories that make us all look bad to others. Thanks, Hans.

[ScoutII]

Permission to hunt is the key to a good landowner-hunter relationship. If a hunter will not even take the time to ask or find out who's land he or she is ON I think they really do not have the time to REALLY ENJOY hunting.

Many of the things you suggest require people to do all the work so someone else can reap the harvest. If someone is looking for a privilege, wouldn't it make sense that some kind of effort on their part should be expected.

We have County and Township boards who help us with what is safe and proper use of the lands in their jurisdiction, they are the governing body elected buy the people of the area.

To try to FORCE some idea onto someone will not make any friends, what we need to do is work together. People use to help each other, but nowadays it seems people are so put out if they do not get what they want, when they want it, whether they deserve it or not. Remember owning a firearm is still a RIGHT, but hunting is all too often only a PRIVELAGE like driving.

As president JFK believed: Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country.

[Hammer Handle]

Odds are, if someone asked me to hunt my land or ditches, I would let them.

But, to say anyone can go in and hunt the ditches without permission...no way. What happens if I just allowed someone to pick berries along the ditch? If they get shot...could I be sued?

Make it all illegal if it is confusing. Safer for all and drivers on the road.

Making it legal will make lands more unsafe and encourage more tresspassing.

[sparcebag]

Hammer no you cant be sued.In minnesota once permission is given all liabilities are void,now with a trespasser I'm not sure?But Id bet they could sue.Permission issue in in hunting rules hand book.

[Hammer Handle]

But, if the land was legal for all to go in...and a berry picker goes in (legally now) and I come along hunting and shoot the berry picker (accidentally)...can I be sued for he was there legally and I didn't know he was there?

That is why I say...you must get permission. Safer for all. No grey areas, no confusion. If private land or a ditch next to it...you MUST get permission.

[sparcebag]

I should hope so if thats how safe you are when hunting.Ya know....Know your suroundings,your target,if not sure dont fire.Ya ever been to firearms classes I was in 1959 and I yet remember that

lets say that berry picker was on a WMA

[hanso612]

I'm glad to see you guys are still arguing about this. It proves my point that it is very unclear in the books. Hammer Handle, I also want to make it clear, that some ditches in Minnesota belong entirely to all Minnesotans its Just a matter of finding out which ones. The landowner who chases one off these public lands is as rude as a hunter who hasn't done his homework or asked permission.

The beauty of what I am proposing is that it gets the disfranchised road hunters away from hunting ditches near farmsteads and CRP (where most of the cover is now)and out in the croplands where it is clear no one else is hiding in the grass. I was almost shot two years ago hunting out of a camo ground blind and would love to mow the ditch next to my CRP to show that there are no pheasants in the ditch. I would also love cost share to help plant native grass in my ditches out by the crop fields to help with nesting cover. I think farmers could be influenced by tying subsidies, crop insurance, and mailbox money to compliance with not mowing ditches.

There is a large number of hunters who are already hunting as if all ditches are legal. I just want to get them out of their cars and into safe ditches. I also want to help allieviate pressure on our WMA system. If you don't think I'm right, try finding an open WMA in Rock county on the opener.

p.s. In this argument, we are still looking for someone to step up with a definitive answer to question of weather it is legal to shoot over the fenceline at flying birds that left from public property.

Thanks for all the input-there is no right or wrong answers just persuasive arguments or not. Hans.

[ScoutII]

When it comes to State Owned property the Small parcels I SEE that are owned by the State {All of us}, I always see a NO TRESSPASSING sign. This sign is probably there because the State maybe trying to protect us from ourselves? Some of these parcels are 2-10 acres in size, huntable for maybe 2 people at most, but protected by being posted by the State {us}. So I maybe assume that the State {us} do not feel these parcels should be accessible for just anyone at just any time? Some parcels are just not appropriate to be used for hunting and some parcels the State is hoping to be able to prevent some people from dumping garbage on.

It is necassarry in some areas to clear the ditches of new growth in the fall so snow does not collect on the roadway. With the cost of everything going through the roof snow removal is no exception. If the ditch growth is taller than the road surface {works like a snow fence} snow will collect on the roadway costing our goverment agencies more for removal.

Page 12,TRESSPASS LAW[A person may not enter agricultural land for outdoor recreational purposes without permission,]

Quote [The beauty of what I am proposing is that it gets the disfranchised road hunters away from hunting ditches near farmsteads and CRP (where most of the cover is now)and out in the croplands where it is clear no one else is hiding in the grass.] Let us quit this jumping back and forth across the fence here. The rules are clear when it comes to cropland! CRP lands are also protected from tresspass. We can not HAVE our cake and EAT it, one or the other.

Page 13 Definitions [Hunters and Trappers:Always respect private lands. Ask first before entering lands not posted as being open to hunting and trapping. you will improve relationships between landowners and recreationists, and you will have a more enjoyable time in the field.] Assuming the land along a road is public land or not is only guessing. More often than not the land is private. Is it worth looking for that very small percentage of land that may be as you believe public owned? I do not think there is enough of this land in exsistence to even be worth looking for.

Page 12 RESTRICTIONS:[A person may not take a wild animal on any land where the person is prohibited from lawfully entering by this law.] Maybe the state just needs to change the ONE WORD [on] to {ON OR OVER} as in the BIG GAME RULES to make it simple to understand. Do you think that this might be enough to keep some people from trying to CHEAT the system looking for some small loop-hole in the rules to justify their unexcusable interpretation of the present rules?

Our legislators are always changing the wording of the rules to clarify grey areas. Right now they think we could use a regulation book for big-game hunting in the mong language. This is to help make it easier for non-english speaking people to participate safeley in big game hunting. Give them a chance, if something is good for the general public, they do listen.