UKC Forums - WI Hunting Dog Retrieval

Show all 24 posts from this thread on one page

UKC Forums (http://forums.ukcdogs.com/index.php)
- UKC Coonhounds (http://forums.ukcdogs.com/forumdisplay.php?forumid=4)
-- WI Hunting Dog Retrieval (http://forums.ukcdogs.com/showthread.php?threadid=928309954)

Posted by Kler Kry on 03-23-2013 06:55 PM:

WI Hunting Dog Retrieval

The WI Conservation Congress is having its annual meeting on April 8 in every County of the State. Currently WI does not have a legal method for retrieving a hunting dog from land where you don't have permission to be. I'd like to see a proposed method voted on in each County on 4-8-13. Do you have any suggestions for the resolution? What has worked in other States? My understanding is that currently a dog on land where you do not have permission is considered to be free roaming "At Large" and not under the owners control even though it might have a GPS and training collar on it.
Please provide any information that you can from other States that we might use in Wisconsin.

THANKS

Posted by jimmy on 03-23-2013 08:02 PM:

Would be nice just to cover our butts!

Jimmy

Posted by runnin rebels on 03-23-2013 09:12 PM:

That sucks

Here is how it is written in Minnesota, hope this helps.

• A person on foot may, without permission, enter private land without a firearm to retrieve a hunting dog. After retrieving the dog, the person must immediately leave the premises. This exception does not authorize the taking of the wild animal.

__________________
GRNITECH PR. RUNNIN REBEL TCSC OLD BLUE 2012 World Hunt Qualified / Top 20
NITECH PR. THE RUNNIN REBEL COWBOY JR DOG 2012 World Hunt Qualified

Posted by Brandon Gudgeon on 03-23-2013 09:17 PM:

Re: WI Hunting Dog Retrieval

quote:
Originally posted by Kler Kry
The WI Conservation Congress is having its annual meeting on April 8 in every County of the State. Currently WI does not have a legal method for retrieving a hunting dog from land where you don't have permission to be. I'd like to see a proposed method voted on in each County on 4-8-13. Do you have any suggestions for the resolution? What has worked in other States? My understanding is that currently a dog on land where you do not have permission is considered to be free roaming "At Large" and not under the owners control even though it might have a GPS and training collar on it.
Please provide any information that you can from other States that we might use in Wisconsin.

THANKS

I like how Minnesota has it written. Some District Attorney's adopt their views, but us Wisconsinites do need something in black and white.

I do "at large" is arguable with tracking devices on hunting dogs. Pretty sure in court, houndsman will win the "at large" argument most of the time. Again, we do need something adopted into our laws so we don't have to rely on "in most cases" type scenarios.

__________________
Brandon Gudgeon
Benton, WI
(608)-606-2608

NiteCh 'PR' Beast Mode Tramp
- 1st Runner Up Jr Young Guns 2014 National BBOA Days - 300+
- 9th place (Friday night) 2014 National BBOA Days - 250+
- 1st place opens 2014 WI State BBOA Championship - 837.5+
- UKC 2nd - 100+
- UKC 1st - 225+
- 2015 Zone 3 BBOA Championship King of Hunt
- 2015 Iowa State BBCHA King of Hunt (1st place NtCh)
- 2016 Zone 3 BBOA Championship 1st place NtCh (Fri Night)

R.I.P.

Ch NiteCh 'PR' Gabby's Tree Poundin Bocephus

Posted by Blackwater Pete on 03-24-2013 04:24 PM:

where will the sauk co. meeting be held and can anyone go? and time thanks Ken

__________________
Half owner Nt.Ch. Ch. Repeat's little Pinkslip
ch. pr smoker's wood hippie
Pr nocturnal Kryptonite
Proud member of PKC
Jason Denzer

Posted by JJWI on 03-24-2013 04:37 PM:

Were will it be for Marathon, Wood and Portage counties. Will get the word out among the other houndsmen in this area!

Posted by Diggerman on 03-24-2013 05:37 PM:

Re: Re: WI Hunting Dog Retrieval

quote:
Originally posted by Brandon Gudgeon
I like how Minnesota has it written. Some District Attorney's adopt their views, but us Wisconsinites do need something in black and white.

I do "at large" is arguable with tracking devices on hunting dogs. Pretty sure in court, houndsman will win the "at large" argument most of the time. Again, we do need something adopted into our laws so we don't have to rely on "in most cases" type scenarios.

Branden,I think what Kenny is sayin is that if you donnot have permission to be on that proprty,your hound is now running at large, whether you have a tracking collar or not. I am not sure but Kenney said the wording got changed last year somehow.I don't know if it has been court tested yet.

__________________
All my life I wanted to be somebody, now I realize I should have been more specific. I carry a gun because I am too young to die and too old to take an asswhoopin.

Posted by Kler Kry on 03-25-2013 04:29 PM:

Wisconsin Hound Retreival

The listing of the Conservation Congress April 8 Meeting schedule is on the web site: dnr,wi.gov/, under Conservation Congress section LEARN tab, all County locations are listed. It also explains under this section how you can submit a resolution from your County to address this issure.
I plan to combine the ideas from this post into a resolution and submit it as a resolution from Green Co.
If we start the process now it will be two years before it makes it through the whole process.
I like the Mn. procedure. It is short and direct and addresses the need of getting the dog as quickly as possible which is in the best interest of all parties involved.

Posted by Jake Appel on 03-25-2013 09:10 PM:

This is how it is listed in the current regulations.

Dogs
• Dogs are considered private property and are protected by law.
• Owners may be held responsible for damage caused by their dogs while hunting or for dogs
running at large.
• It is illegal to allow a dog to run at large, however, a dog that is actively engaged in a
legal hunting activity, including training, is not considered to be running at large if the
dog is monitored or supervised by a person and the dog is on land that is open to public
hunting or on land for which the person has obtained permission to hunt with or to train
a dog.

__________________
Blue Oak Kennels
GO TEAM BLUE
HOME OF:
CH.NT.CH.'PR' APPELS BLUE OAK GERT
GR.CH.GR.NT.CH. MANNS WILD N BLUE MINDY III
CH.GR.NT.CH. APPEL'S BLUE OAK BOOMIN' JET
GR.NT.CH. APPEL'S BLUE OAK GUNSMOKE
GR.CH.NT.CH. APPEL'S BLUE OAK GERT'S LADY
GR.NT.CH. APPEL'S BLUE OAK HONEY BEE
NT.CH. APPEL'S BLUE OAK SMOKIN GUN

GONE BUT NOT FORGOTTEN
GR.CH.GR.NT.CH.'PR' SHELTONS SMOKEY RIVER FLY
GR.CH.NT.CH. 'PR' APPEL'S BLUE OAK TIMBER
GR.CH.GR.NT.CH.'PR' APPELS BLUE OAK BULLET-- 9TH PLACE 2008 UKC WORLD
GR.CH.GR.NT.CH.'PR' APPELS BLUE OAK JET 6 ECHO

Posted by Dan Dogs on 03-25-2013 10:58 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by Jake Appel
This is how it is listed in the current regulations.

Dogs
• Dogs are considered private property and are protected by law.
• Owners may be held responsible for damage caused by their dogs while hunting or for dogs
running at large.
• It is illegal to allow a dog to run at large, however, a dog that is actively engaged in a
legal hunting activity, including training, is not considered to be running at large if the
dog is monitored or supervised by a person and the dog is on land that is open to public
hunting or on land for which the person has obtained permission to hunt with or to train
a dog.

thats the problem, on one side of the fence it's a legal hunt. and as soon as the dog crosses a line fence it becomes running at large..

__________________
Home of:
- Gr. Nite Ch. Iowa County Crybabe
- Nite Ch. Hickory Nut Dan
- Gr. CH Nite Ch. Hickory Nut Dan II
- CH. Gr. Nite Ch. Hickory Nut Dan III 2008 Performance Sire
- CH. Gr.Nite Ch. Hickory Nut Dan IV 2004 ukc world hunt finalist
- Ch. Gr.Nite Ch. Mounds Creek Sassy II
- Nite Ch. Hickory Nut Bucky HTX 3 wins towards grnite
- GrCh.GrNtCh Hickory Nut Bawlie HTX
-Nite ch. PR Iowa County CryBaby II 2013 Badger State Hunt Champion
qualified for 2013 UKC World Hunt
CH Nitech She Hate Me (scar) HTX Iowa County Kennels

Posted by Kler Kry on 03-27-2013 02:05 AM:

WI Right to Retrieve

Please not Jerry Moll's post on Illinois Right to Retrieve Bill
Illinois is ahead of Wisconsin on this issue.

Posted by Larry Atherton on 03-28-2013 12:26 AM:

In Michigan, we can retrieve our dogs unless the land owner or represntative tells us we can not retrieve our dog(s). Then we must contact a LEO for help.

I will post the actual language tomorrow for you. I am getting ready to hit the woods tonight.

__________________
Larry Atherton

Aim small miss small

Posted by tollhoff on 03-28-2013 01:26 AM:

This year while coyote hunting in Lincoln county wi. We were hunting on private land that we had permission to hunt on and the dogs lost the track,a house dog was barking across the highway that the dogs heard and they ran into the guys yard,the land owner caught the dogs and wrote down the information on the collar before giving the dog to their owner. The owner of the dogs was right there trying to catch his dogs before they got on the land owners land but was unable to do so.The land owner then called law inforcement, when law inforcement arrived he gave the owner of the dogs a 263.00 fine on 3 different charges I don't know what all the charges were but one was dogs running at large . The owner of the dogs called the Wi bear hunter assc. they told him that there is laws in wi.that do not allow hunting dogs to be on private land without permission and are subject to fines but not all countys adopt it as a county ordinance

__________________
PINE RIDGE BLUETICK KENNEL

Posted by bonehead on 03-28-2013 07:38 AM:

Btt!

Posted by Larry Atherton on 03-28-2013 02:47 PM:

Michigan

Number (4) is the section of interest.

NATURAL RESOURCES AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACT (EXCERPT)
Act 451 of 1994
324.73102 Entering or remaining on property of another; consent; exceptions.
Sec. 73102. (1) Except as provided in subsection (4), a person shall not enter or remain upon the property
of another person, other than farm property or a wooded area connected to farm property, to engage in any
recreational activity or trapping on that property without the consent of the owner or his or her lessee or agent,
if either of the following circumstances exists:
(a) The property is fenced or enclosed and is maintained in such a manner as to exclude intruders.
(b) The property is posted in a conspicuous manner against entry. The minimum letter height on the
posting signs shall be 1 inch. Each posting sign shall be not less than 50 square inches, and the signs shall be
spaced to enable a person to observe not less than 1 sign at any point of entry upon the property.
(2) Except as provided in subsection (4), a person shall not enter or remain upon farm property or a
wooded area connected to farm property for any recreational activity or trapping without the consent of the
owner or his or her lessee or agent, whether or not the farm property or wooded area connected to farm
property is fenced, enclosed, or posted.
(3) On fenced or posted property or farm property, a fisherman wading or floating a navigable public
stream may, without written or oral consent, enter upon property within the clearly defined banks of the
stream or, without damaging farm products, walk a route as closely proximate to the clearly defined bank as
possible when necessary to avoid a natural or artificial hazard or obstruction, including, but not limited to, a
dam, deep hole, or a fence or other exercise of ownership by the riparian owner.
(4) A person other than a person possessing a firearm may, unless previously prohibited in writing or orally
by the property owner or his or her lessee or agent, enter on foot upon the property of another person for the
sole purpose of retrieving a hunting dog. The person shall not remain on the property beyond the reasonable
time necessary to retrieve the dog. In an action under section 73109 or 73110, the burden of showing that the
property owner or his or her lessee or agent previously prohibited entry under this subsection is on the
plaintiff or prosecuting attorney, respectively.
(5) Consent to enter or remain upon the property of another person pursuant to this section may be given
orally or in writing. The consent may establish conditions for entering or remaining upon that property.
Unless prohibited in the written consent, a written consent may be amended or revoked orally. If the owner or
his or her lessee or agent requires all persons entering or remaining upon the property to have written consent,
the presence of the person on the property without written consent is prima facie evidence of unlawful entry.
History: Add. 1995, Act 58, Imd. Eff. May 24, 1995;¾Am. 1998, Act 546, Eff. Mar. 23, 1999.
Popular name: Act 451
Popular name: NREPA
Popular name: Recreational Trespass Act
Rendered

__________________
Larry Atherton

Aim small miss small

Posted by robert54843 on 03-28-2013 03:37 PM:

This is something we all have issues with, a few bad apples make it hard for the rest of us. Most people in my area hate hound hunters, It would be nice to be able to get a dog back without being screamed at or feeling like your tresspassing. We always try to get permission first but if no ones home or no answer we just go get our dogs. if it happens. Ill be at my countys meeting for sure.

Posted by skratdogg32 on 03-29-2013 12:15 AM:

iowa is

under iowa law a person is not trespassing when they enter another's property for the sole purpose of retrieving their property which has accidentally or inadvertently strayed onto the property.
provided that the person takes the most direct and accessible route to and from the property in a quick manner without interfering with the owner's use of the property
see iowa code section 716.7

and

it is a criminal offense to injure or kill a dog in the state of iowa the unjustified killing of a dog may result in imprisonment up to two years ,up to a six thousand two hundred and fifty dollar fine or both
see iowa code section 717b.2

Posted by Kler Kry on 03-29-2013 10:46 PM:

Dog Retrieval - WWLF-Corky Meyer

Does the WI. Wildlife Federation have anything going on this problem?

Posted by Eric J on 03-30-2013 05:50 PM:

Bear Hunters Assc.

As big as it is and as many members as it has I am really surprised they have not done something to get a law passed on this issue. In my opinion they should be pushing to get one every chance they have and it should be a number one priority.

Posted by Corky Meyer on 03-30-2013 10:57 PM:

WiWF Resolution needed

The WiWF has a hunting dog committe, they have talked about this for years. and are looking for committe members

hey, just a reminder, i retired from going to meetings over a year ago. just cannot afford to pay the way any more,

if someone wants to pick up the flag, i'll help coach you.

write up a resolution for the Federation and i'll get it to them for you, or help any way i can.

this is long time over do, just don't expect me to do it for you.

you want somthing done..... get involved

__________________
Corky
still listening to the music of the hounds

Posted by Diggerman on 04-01-2013 03:21 AM:

I cannot beleive in wisconsin we donnot have a right to retreive as all the states around us do. Thanks for bringing to our attention Kenny.

__________________
All my life I wanted to be somebody, now I realize I should have been more specific. I carry a gun because I am too young to die and too old to take an asswhoopin.

Posted by Kler Kry on 04-04-2013 10:59 PM:

Wisconsin Hunting Dog Retrieval

Thanks to everyone for their contributions to this thread. It appears that all the States surrounding WI have a policy in effect.
Please plan to attend the Spring Conservation Congress Meeting on Monday, 4-8-2013. There will be alot of new faces attending this. The wolf harvest season is bringing out alot of opposition.
We must stay united if we are to preserve our second amendment rights and can continue to hunt, fish, and trap.

Send me your e-mail lf you would like a copy of the Dog Retrieval Resolution that will be submitted in Green Co.

Posted by Diggerman on 04-05-2013 02:27 PM:

Re: Bear Hunters Assc.

quote:
Originally posted by Eric J
As big as it is and as many members as it has I am really surprised they have not done something to get a law passed on this issue. In my opinion they should be pushing to get one every chance they have and it should be a number one priority.

Hey Eric, I called and talked to Al Lobner, He said that they have worked on it in the past but nothing in recent years. They were unaware that we were the only state here without aretrieval law.He said he would look into it but made no promises. It sounds like they have spent alot of money and political capitol on the wolf thing,and rightly so. But I bet if the WBH continues to get calls and e-mails they will find time to help us.
Go on to the WBH website,contacts,commitees, find out who is in your area and send them an e-mail. It important this week as the annual meeting is today and tommorow and maybe they could atleast discuss it.

__________________
All my life I wanted to be somebody, now I realize I should have been more specific. I carry a gun because I am too young to die and too old to take an asswhoopin.

Posted by Corky Meyer on 04-20-2013 12:35 AM:

results from spring hearings

Green 230113 Retrieval of hunting dogs from property without landowner permission 40 17 PASS
Iowa 250113 21 4 PASS
Lafayette330113 35 2 PASS
Rock 540313 46 6 PASS

__________________
Corky
still listening to the music of the hounds

All times are GMT. The time now is 11:44 AM.

Show all 24 posts from this thread on one page