GSS said:

---

txags92 said:

---

Russ11 said:

---

Plus something to be said about going out to a remote property to escape the busy world and then having someone show up on foot in the dark to check you...

I don't think I am willing to give up my personal private freedom because other bad apples are breaking the law.

---

Just put up a high fence and kill/push all the game animals out before you close the last panel and you can tell the game warden to pound sand because you have no game on the property for him or her to check and don't hunt anything. If you want to have game on the property and hunt it, you aren't giving up a personal private freedom that you never had to begin with.

---

I think that is a gross misrepresentation, and response to, of what Russ11 was stating. Where did he state he was trying to do anything related to game laws?

---

Yup, basically just commenting on big brother is everywhere...

GSS said:

---

txags92 said:

---

Russ11 said:

---

Plus something to be said about going out to a remote property to escape the busy world and then having someone show up on foot in the dark to check you...

I don't think I am willing to give up my personal private freedom because other bad apples are breaking the law.

---

Just put up a high fence and kill/push all the game animals out before you close the last panel and you can tell the game warden to pound sand because you have no game on the property for him or her to check and don't hunt anything. If you want to have game on the property and hunt it, you aren't giving up a personal private freedom that you never had to begin with.

---

I think that is a gross misrepresentation, and response to, of what Russ11 was stating. Where did he state he was trying to do anything related to game laws?

---

He said he isn't willing to give up his personal freedom. Right now, he has game on the property that belong to the state and under existing state law, the wardens have the right to come on his property unannounced to check that he is not violating laws regarding the hunting of those game animals. So he doesn't have that personal freedom right now and nothing in the proposed legislation being discussed is asking him to give up any freedom he already has.

If he wants to enjoy his property free of "harassment" from game wardens, all he has to do is get all of the state owned game off his property and they will no longer have any reason to need to come check his property. Yes it is a ridiculous case example, but the wardens are not there to invade his privacy, they are there to verify that he is not violating laws regarding the taking of state owned resources. Unlike DPS writing speeding tickets or wardens checking boats on public waters, hunting takes place almost exclusively on private land in Texas, so necessarily, enforcing the laws regarding it will also take place almost exclusively on private land.

txags92 said:

---

GSS said:

---

txags92 said:

---

Russ11 said:

---

Plus something to be said about going out to a remote property to escape the busy world and then having someone show up on foot in the dark to check you...

I don't think I am willing to give up my personal private freedom because other bad apples are breaking the law.

---

Just put up a high fence and kill/push all the game animals out before you close the last panel and you can tell the game warden to pound sand because you have no game on the property for him or her to check and don't hunt anything. If you want to have game on the property and hunt it, you aren't giving up a personal private freedom that you never had to begin with.

---

I think that is a gross misrepresentation, and response to, of what Russ11 was stating. Where did he state he was trying to do anything related to game laws?

---

He said he isn't willing to give up his personal freedom. Right now, he has game on the property that belong to the state and under existing state law, the wardens have the right to come on his property unannounced to check that he is not violating laws regarding the hunting of those game animals. So he doesn't have that personal freedom right now and nothing in the proposed legislation being discussed is asking him to give up any freedom he already has.

If he wants to enjoy his property free of "harassment" from game wardens, all he has to do is get all of the state owned game off his property and they will no longer have any reason to need to come check his property. Yes it is a ridiculous case example, but the wardens are not there to invade his privacy, they are there to verify that he is not violating laws regarding the taking of state owned resources. Unlike DPS writing speeding tickets or wardens checking boats on public waters, hunting takes place almost exclusively on private land in Texas, so necessarily, enforcing the laws regarding it will also take place almost exclusively on private land.

---

Sorry my tenses were incorrect, understood I don't currently have that right and having to give them up.

More was speaking to it would be nice too have that right

High fence, low fence or no fence, good luck getting the warden to leave by telling him there is no game on your property

GSS said:

---

txags92 said:

---

GSS said:

---

txags92 said:

---

Russ11 said:

---

Plus something to be said about going out to a remote property to escape the busy world and then having someone show up on foot in the dark to check you...

I don't think I am willing to give up my personal private freedom because other bad apples are breaking the law.

---

Just put up a high fence and kill/push all the game animals out before you close the last panel and you can tell the game warden to pound sand because you have no game on the property for him or her to check and don't hunt anything. If you want to have game on the property and hunt it, you aren't giving up a personal private freedom that you never had to begin with.

---

I think that is a gross misrepresentation, and response to, of what Russ11 was stating. Where did he state he was trying to do anything related to game laws?

---

He said he isn't willing to give up his personal freedom. Right now, he has game on the property that belong to the state and under existing state law, the wardens have the right to come on his property unannounced to check that he is not violating laws regarding the hunting of those game animals. So he doesn't have that personal freedom right now and nothing in the proposed legislation being discussed is asking him to give up any freedom he already has.

If he wants to enjoy his property free of "harassment" from game wardens, all he has to do is get all of the state owned game off his property and they will no longer have any reason to need to come check his property. Yes it is a ridiculous case example, but the wardens are not there to invade his privacy, they are there to verify that he is not violating laws regarding the taking of state owned resources. Unlike DPS writing speeding tickets or wardens checking boats on public waters, hunting takes place almost exclusively on private land in Texas, so necessarily, enforcing the laws regarding it will also take place almost exclusively on private land.

---

Since you're into "ridiculous case examples", a state employee that takes home a laptop, or is driving a state-owned vehicle...have they given up their 4th Amendment rights, and should be subject to a warrantless search?

---

That has nothing to do with the 4th amendment. They're working in an employer/employee relationship. That's not a private property situation. The employer (the state) has full authority to get their property from their employees

GSS said:

---

txags92 said:

---

GSS said:

---

txags92 said:

---

Russ11 said:

---

Plus something to be said about going out to a remote property to escape the busy world and then having someone show up on foot in the dark to check you...

I don't think I am willing to give up my personal private freedom because other bad apples are breaking the law.

---

Just put up a high fence and kill/push all the game animals out before you close the last panel and you can tell the game warden to pound sand because you have no game on the property for him or her to check and don't hunt anything. If you want to have game on the property and hunt it, you aren't giving up a personal private freedom that you never had to begin with.

---

I think that is a gross misrepresentation, and response to, of what Russ11 was stating. Where did he state he was trying to do anything related to game laws?

---

He said he isn't willing to give up his personal freedom. Right now, he has game on the property that belong to the state and under existing state law, the wardens have the right to come on his property unannounced to check that he is not violating laws regarding the hunting of those game animals. So he doesn't have that personal freedom right now and nothing in the proposed legislation being discussed is asking him to give up any freedom he already has.

If he wants to enjoy his property free of "harassment" from game wardens, all he has to do is get all of the state owned game off his property and they will no longer have any reason to need to come check his property. Yes it is a ridiculous case example, but the wardens are not there to invade his privacy, they are there to verify that he is not violating laws regarding the taking of state owned resources. Unlike DPS writing speeding tickets or wardens checking boats on public waters, hunting takes place almost exclusively on private land in Texas, so necessarily, enforcing the laws regarding it will also take place almost exclusively on private land.

---

Since you're into "ridiculous case examples", a state employee that takes home a laptop, or is driving a state-owned vehicle...have they given up their 4th Amendment rights, and should be subject to a warrantless search?

---

As the husband of a state employee, I would bet you their IT and remote work agreements take care of that. And no, my wife doesn't work for TPWD.

Quote:

---

Since you're into "ridiculous case examples", a state employee that takes home a laptop, or is driving a state-owned vehicle...have they given up their 4th Amendment rights, and should be subject to a warrantless search?

---

"That has nothing to do with the 4th amendment. They're working in an employer/employee relationship. That's not a private property situation. The employer (the state) has full authority to get their property from their employees"


You completely missed the point of my post. Does the mere possession of "state owned property" allow a warrantless search of one's private property? For whatever reason? Nothing to do with the state "getting their property from an employee"..

And I didn't start the "ridiculous case examples"...nor did I write the 4th Amendment (but I like it).

Gunny456 said:

---

As a ranch owner for 35 years i never broke any laws or did anything wrong that would make me worry about a GW being able to access my property.
I have instances that I'm glad he could access my property to catch bad guys.
No game warden or TPWD ever abused the right to come on my land… quite to the contrary… I welcomed them.
I would have to ask…. Who would be of most benefit as a landowner to prohibit a GW from coming onto your land without a warrant and looking around?

---

I would think you could give your GW written permission to come on your place as they see fit but I think this is a good change.

Capt. Augustus McCrae said:

---

GSS said:

---

txags92 said:

---

GSS said:

---

txags92 said:

---

Russ11 said:

---

Plus something to be said about going out to a remote property to escape the busy world and then having someone show up on foot in the dark to check you...

I don't think I am willing to give up my personal private freedom because other bad apples are breaking the law.

---

Just put up a high fence and kill/push all the game animals out before you close the last panel and you can tell the game warden to pound sand because you have no game on the property for him or her to check and don't hunt anything. If you want to have game on the property and hunt it, you aren't giving up a personal private freedom that you never had to begin with.

---

I think that is a gross misrepresentation, and response to, of what Russ11 was stating. Where did he state he was trying to do anything related to game laws?

---

He said he isn't willing to give up his personal freedom. Right now, he has game on the property that belong to the state and under existing state law, the wardens have the right to come on his property unannounced to check that he is not violating laws regarding the hunting of those game animals. So he doesn't have that personal freedom right now and nothing in the proposed legislation being discussed is asking him to give up any freedom he already has.

If he wants to enjoy his property free of "harassment" from game wardens, all he has to do is get all of the state owned game off his property and they will no longer have any reason to need to come check his property. Yes it is a ridiculous case example, but the wardens are not there to invade his privacy, they are there to verify that he is not violating laws regarding the taking of state owned resources. Unlike DPS writing speeding tickets or wardens checking boats on public waters, hunting takes place almost exclusively on private land in Texas, so necessarily, enforcing the laws regarding it will also take place almost exclusively on private land.

---

Since you're into "ridiculous case examples", a state employee that takes home a laptop, or is driving a state-owned vehicle...have they given up their 4th Amendment rights, and should be subject to a warrantless search?

---

That has nothing to do with the 4th amendment. They're working in an employer/employee relationship. That's not a private property situation. The employer (the state) has full authority to get their property from their employees

---

Probably also going to be a moot point too with Abbott ordering the agencies to fully return to office ASAP. Will be interesting to see how it gets handled. My wife's group has 50+ people and only about 35 cubes/offices.

GSS said:

---

Quote:

---

Since you're into "ridiculous case examples", a state employee that takes home a laptop, or is driving a state-owned vehicle...have they given up their 4th Amendment rights, and should be subject to a warrantless search?

---

"That has nothing to do with the 4th amendment. They're working in an employer/employee relationship. That's not a private property situation. The employer (the state) has full authority to get their property from their employees"


You completely missed the point of my post. Does the mere possession of "state owned property" allow a warrantless search of one's private property? For whatever reason? Nothing to do with the state "getting their property from an employee"..

And I didn't start the "ridiculous case examples"...nor did I write the 4th Amendment (but I like it).

---

Game wardens don't have the right for warrantless search "for any reason" either. Their ability to enter the property without a warrant is specific to enforcing the wildlife code. They generally can't and won't go into a house or structure unless they have probable cause of something or the landowner gives them permission, and with a few exceptions, they are not going to be looking for other crimes to enforce.

txags92 said:

---

Gunny456 said:

---

So what about being able to access poaching operations or deer breeder violations that landowners are aware of?

---

Rep Curry has filed a bill that will fix that too. He wants to take away TPWD's deer breeder permit and allow anybody with an 8' or taller fence to be a deer breeder, regulated as an "agricultural activity". Meaning deer behind high fences will officially be livestock, not game animals.

---

Don't care for this above. So, a Question/statement about this. If you have a high fence a place and it has big game on it (whitetail deer, Mule deer etc.) that is public owned game correct? So do the High fence places have to drive out all the game? Do they pay the state for what they may have on the property? Does the State sell game to the public to be privately owned? Where do the imported deer come from. If from a different State, I am pretty sure it is considered the property of the citizens in that state right. This is where I just don't understand how deer breeders came about and how high fence places were ever allowed in the first place, except if you only had exotics on the place and it was high fenced. I guess all these state agencies never thought about this happening and had nothing on the books about it. After years of this happening you can hardly stop any of it.

drred4 said:

---

txags92 said:

---

Gunny456 said:

---

So what about being able to access poaching operations or deer breeder violations that landowners are aware of?

---

Rep Curry has filed a bill that will fix that too. He wants to take away TPWD's deer breeder permit and allow anybody with an 8' or taller fence to be a deer breeder, regulated as an "agricultural activity". Meaning deer behind high fences will officially be livestock, not game animals.

---

Don't care for this above. So, a Question/statement about this. If you have a high fence a place and it has big game on it (whitetail deer, Mule deer etc.) that is public owned game correct? So do the High fence places have to drive out all the game? Do they pay the state for what they may have on the property? Does the State sell game to the public to be privately owned? Where do the imported deer come from. If from a different State, I am pretty sure it is considered the property of the citizens in that state right. This is where I just don't understand how deer breeders came about and how high fence places were ever allowed in the first place, except if you only had exotics on the place and it was high fenced. I guess all these state agencies never thought about this happening and had nothing on the books about it. After years of this happening you can hardly stop any of it.

---

It is a very mixed up system that doesn't make much sense. TPWD made a huge mistake ever allowing breeding and direct sale of WTD because it implied ownership of what is supposed to be a state resource.

O.G. said:

---

We had a game warden in Brownwood for years that was notorious for showing up in deer camps, coming onto property excessively, checking the same people multiple times etc. He had no business in law enforcement of any kind, zero. Let alone an agency that many think is/was exempt for the 4th ammendment.

This guy did a 3am solo "raid" on a hunters cabin to check the licences of a husband and wife dove hunting.

He cost multiple landowners/guides etc a lot of business over the years & his behavior was tolerated by the upper admiistration of TPWD.

Thomas Payne, TJ, John Adams and the boys did not carve out an exemption for TPWD when they made the 4th ammendment.

---

This game warden have a name?

txags92 said:

---

O.G. said:

---

We had a game warden in Brownwood for years that was notorious for showing up in deer camps, coming onto property excessively, checking the same people multiple times etc. He had no business in law enforcement of any kind, zero. Let alone an agency that many think is/was exempt for the 4th ammendment.

This guy did a 3am solo "raid" on a hunters cabin to check the licences of a husband and wife dove hunting.

He cost multiple landowners/guides etc a lot of business over the years & his behavior was tolerated by the upper admiistration of TPWD.

Thomas Payne, TJ, John Adams and the boys did not carve out an exemption for TPWD when they made the 4th ammendment.

---

This game warden have a name?

---

Leroy Polnic. (Sp?) on that last name.
He went to the Lutheran chuch with my grandmother and he tried that John Wayne BS with me once but I was legally correct & he had to back down.

Edit: ANYONE from Brownwood that hunts or fishes will know that name.

O.G. said:

---

txags92 said:

---

O.G. said:

---

We had a game warden in Brownwood for years that was notorious for showing up in deer camps, coming onto property excessively, checking the same people multiple times etc. He had no business in law enforcement of any kind, zero. Let alone an agency that many think is/was exempt for the 4th ammendment.

This guy did a 3am solo "raid" on a hunters cabin to check the licences of a husband and wife dove hunting.

He cost multiple landowners/guides etc a lot of business over the years & his behavior was tolerated by the upper admiistration of TPWD.

Thomas Payne, TJ, John Adams and the boys did not carve out an exemption for TPWD when they made the 4th ammendment.

---

This game warden have a name?

---

Leroy Polnic. (Sp?) on that last name.
He went to the Lutheran chuch with my grandmother and he tried that John Wayne BS with me once but I was legally correct & he had to back down.

Edit: ANYONE from Brownwood that hunts or fishes will know that name.

---

Looks like it was Polnick and sounds like he did have a reputation. Luckily he is retired now.

txags92 said:

---

Capt. Augustus McCrae said:

---

Limiting government is never a bad thing. The "I've never had anybody do anything to me, so I don't see a problem with it" crowd just haven't added "yet" to their sentence.

What's wrong with getting a warrant? If you invite them onto your property to see something suspicious, they don't need a warrant. Otherwise, the 4th amendment protects you from this exact behavior.

---

How do you get a warrant with probable cause to prove that somebody is hunting out of season and killing dozens of deer beyond their bag limits on a 3,000 acre property where you can't see their camphouse or processing area from the road? How do you get a warrant with probable cause that people are hunting dove over a baited field without being able to go look for bait in the field?

---

Probable cause necessarily precedes searches for evidence. This is the essence of 4th amendment protection, preventing unlawful search and seizure. It CAN be very frustrating, but it is what distinguishes US from much of the rest of the world. It can shelter criminal activity, but it's a price worth paying.

Gunny456 said:

---

As a ranch owner for 35 years i never broke any laws or did anything wrong that would make me worry about a GW being able to access my property.
I have instances that I'm glad he could access my property to catch bad guys.
No game warden or TPWD ever abused the right to come on my land… quite to the contrary… I welcomed them.
I would have to ask…. Who would be of most benefit as a landowner to prohibit a GW from coming onto your land without a warrant and looking around?

---

"with owner permission, probable cause, ....."

If you tell the GW "you can come onto my property without a warrant", you've given permission. If the GW suspects poaching going on under any reasonable circumstance, that is probable cause.

What this really keeps them from doing is the random driving up to your deer camp and being able to rummage through your stuff and find out you didn't fill out your harvest log or in talking to you finds out you are a heinous criminal and waited until after you took your pictures or got back to camp to put the tag on and fill out your harvest log type of tickets IMO.

Permission, probable cause, pursuit of a criminal - nothing changes I don't think.

txags92 said:

---

Capt. Augustus McCrae said:

---

Limiting government is never a bad thing. The "I've never had anybody do anything to me, so I don't see a problem with it" crowd just haven't added "yet" to their sentence.

What's wrong with getting a warrant? If you invite them onto your property to see something suspicious, they don't need a warrant. Otherwise, the 4th amendment protects you from this exact behavior.

---

How do you get a warrant with probable cause to prove that somebody is hunting out of season and killing dozens of deer beyond their bag limits on a 3,000 acre property where you can't see their camphouse or processing area from the road? How do you get a warrant with probable cause that people are hunting dove over a baited field without being able to go look for bait in the field?

---

Quote:

---

"HB 1379 would allow game wardens to enter private property with owner permission, under probable cause, warrant execution, or while determining an emergency."

---