Private property owners sue over Virginia's hunting dog law

1srelluc

Diamond Member
Nov 21, 2021
51,619
74,423
WILSONS, Va. (AP) — Soon after Jim Medeiros bought his 143-acre (58-hectare) cattle and poultry farm in rural Virginia a decade ago, he and his wife were startled by the sounds of 20 hunting dogs barking and howling as they circled their house and chased their chickens.

When Medeiros confronted a hunter nearby, the man told him he had permission to hunt on Medeiros’ property. In disbelief, Medeiros called the agency that enforces a state law allowing hunters to retrieve their hunting dogs from private property, even when the property owners object.

“He told me, you can't prohibit people from coming onto your land,” recalled Medeiros.

He then pointed out that his land was posted with no trespassing signs.

“I said, 'You don't understand. My land is posted,'" Medeiros said.

“You don't understand," the official responded. “You can't stop them.”

After years of putting up with baying dogs and dead chickens, Medeiros and several other property owners are suing the state over its “right to retrieve” law, arguing that allowing hunters to go on their property without permission amounts to an uncompensated taking of their land and violates the state and federal constitutions.

A number of states allow hunters to retrieve their dogs without permission from property owners under certain circumstances, such as properties that do not have “no trespassing” signs. But Virginia's law says hunters are allowed to retrieve dogs even when the property owner has specifically denied access.

A 2016 report prepared by the Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries, (now the Department of Wildlife Resources), said only one other state, Minnesota, had a similar law. Minnesota's law says a person can enter private land to retrieve a hunting dog without permission of the owner, but cannot have a firearm when doing so and must immediately leave after recovering the dog.

The Virginia property owners are suing the Department of Wildlife Resources, which enforces the law. They are represented by the Pacific Legal Foundation, a conservative legal organization that won a major property rights case at the U.S. Supreme Court last year. The high court found that a California regulation requiring agricultural businesses to allow union organizers onto their property for up to three hours a day, 120 days per year, amounts to the government appropriating “a right of access to private property” and “constitutes a per se physical taking” under the court's precedents.

Private property owners sue over Virginia's hunting dog law

I know the area.....Dog hunters are real assholes with a total disregard for property rights.
 
WILSONS, Va. (AP) — Soon after Jim Medeiros bought his 143-acre (58-hectare) cattle and poultry farm in rural Virginia a decade ago, he and his wife were startled by the sounds of 20 hunting dogs barking and howling as they circled their house and chased their chickens.

When Medeiros confronted a hunter nearby, the man told him he had permission to hunt on Medeiros’ property. In disbelief, Medeiros called the agency that enforces a state law allowing hunters to retrieve their hunting dogs from private property, even when the property owners object.

“He told me, you can't prohibit people from coming onto your land,” recalled Medeiros.

He then pointed out that his land was posted with no trespassing signs.

“I said, 'You don't understand. My land is posted,'" Medeiros said.

“You don't understand," the official responded. “You can't stop them.”

After years of putting up with baying dogs and dead chickens, Medeiros and several other property owners are suing the state over its “right to retrieve” law, arguing that allowing hunters to go on their property without permission amounts to an uncompensated taking of their land and violates the state and federal constitutions.

A number of states allow hunters to retrieve their dogs without permission from property owners under certain circumstances, such as properties that do not have “no trespassing” signs. But Virginia's law says hunters are allowed to retrieve dogs even when the property owner has specifically denied access.

A 2016 report prepared by the Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries, (now the Department of Wildlife Resources), said only one other state, Minnesota, had a similar law. Minnesota's law says a person can enter private land to retrieve a hunting dog without permission of the owner, but cannot have a firearm when doing so and must immediately leave after recovering the dog.

The Virginia property owners are suing the Department of Wildlife Resources, which enforces the law. They are represented by the Pacific Legal Foundation, a conservative legal organization that won a major property rights case at the U.S. Supreme Court last year. The high court found that a California regulation requiring agricultural businesses to allow union organizers onto their property for up to three hours a day, 120 days per year, amounts to the government appropriating “a right of access to private property” and “constitutes a per se physical taking” under the court's precedents.

Private property owners sue over Virginia's hunting dog law

I know the area.....Dog hunters are real assholes with a total disregard for property rights.
Where I come from, if a somebody's dog is chasing your chickens, you can shoot the dogs on the spot if you get a shot at them, same as a coyote or fox. There really isn't a chicken season in TN, so somebody's hunting dogs, go off the trail to attack your chickens is a non-starter. We've been known to shoot our own dog that we otherwise liked, for going after the chickens.
 
Where I come from, if a somebody's dog is chasing your chickens, you can shoot the dogs on the spot if you get a shot at them, same as a coyote or fox. There really isn't a chicken season in TN, so somebody's hunting dogs, go off the trail to attack your chickens is a non-starter.
It's legal here too but most folks really don't want to shoot a dog. They just don't want them running across their property.

How it works is you have lead dogs, the rest are just "noise makers" and those are the ones that are likely getting into the livestock. The lead dogs are trained to return.

Lots of times the hunters don't really care where the noise makers end up.....back in the day the county would set-up pens at country crossroads in the "dog hunting counties" to stick the noise-makers in and the "owners" would come by and load up what was needed for the next hunt.
 
Never had problems with my dog pack because I took the time to train them properly. Dogs can be trained to be called off a track and put back on it. I had a call I did with my voice and I trained them to my cow horn. It just takes time.
 
I don't have a problem with hunters being able to retrieve their dogs, but the hunters should also be liable for any damage caused by their dogs or themselves in the process of retrieving their dogs. Also, the hunters should take due diligence to keep their dogs off posted land and perhaps be fined if they cannot control their dogs.
 
I don't have a problem with hunters being able to retrieve their dogs, but the hunters should also be liable for any damage caused by their dogs or themselves in the process of retrieving their dogs. Also, the hunters should take due diligence to keep their dogs off posted land and perhaps be fined if they cannot control their dogs.
It's just part of a long ingrained "good ol boy" dog hunting system Virginia has been plagued with for generations.

We had to put a freeze on live bear trapping because the bear dog hunters were paying professional trappers to live trap bear in the surrounding western counties and ship them to the dog hunting counties.

They had worked it out with the state representatives that held sway with the game department. It was cruel practice all the way around I saw them take seven in one morning out of the hollow where I hunted.

What got it banned was that they were taking sows and leaving the not yet grown enough cubs behind.

Deer/Bear dog hunters are very poorly regarded in the western counties where it's not allowed.
 
WILSONS, Va. (AP) — Soon after Jim Medeiros bought his 143-acre (58-hectare) cattle and poultry farm in rural Virginia a decade ago, he and his wife were startled by the sounds of 20 hunting dogs barking and howling as they circled their house and chased their chickens.

When Medeiros confronted a hunter nearby, the man told him he had permission to hunt on Medeiros’ property. In disbelief, Medeiros called the agency that enforces a state law allowing hunters to retrieve their hunting dogs from private property, even when the property owners object.

“He told me, you can't prohibit people from coming onto your land,” recalled Medeiros.

He then pointed out that his land was posted with no trespassing signs.

“I said, 'You don't understand. My land is posted,'" Medeiros said.

“You don't understand," the official responded. “You can't stop them.”

After years of putting up with baying dogs and dead chickens, Medeiros and several other property owners are suing the state over its “right to retrieve” law, arguing that allowing hunters to go on their property without permission amounts to an uncompensated taking of their land and violates the state and federal constitutions.

A number of states allow hunters to retrieve their dogs without permission from property owners under certain circumstances, such as properties that do not have “no trespassing” signs. But Virginia's law says hunters are allowed to retrieve dogs even when the property owner has specifically denied access.

A 2016 report prepared by the Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries, (now the Department of Wildlife Resources), said only one other state, Minnesota, had a similar law. Minnesota's law says a person can enter private land to retrieve a hunting dog without permission of the owner, but cannot have a firearm when doing so and must immediately leave after recovering the dog.

The Virginia property owners are suing the Department of Wildlife Resources, which enforces the law. They are represented by the Pacific Legal Foundation, a conservative legal organization that won a major property rights case at the U.S. Supreme Court last year. The high court found that a California regulation requiring agricultural businesses to allow union organizers onto their property for up to three hours a day, 120 days per year, amounts to the government appropriating “a right of access to private property” and “constitutes a per se physical taking” under the court's precedents.

Private property owners sue over Virginia's hunting dog law

I know the area.....Dog hunters are real assholes with a total disregard for property rights.



Yup. The lawsuit has merit. The dog owners are indeed assholes and have only themselves to blame.

I hope they lose their asses.
 
As they say the bad ones screw it up for us good ones who hunt responsibly and are conservationist.
 
WILSONS, Va. (AP) — Soon after Jim Medeiros bought his 143-acre (58-hectare) cattle and poultry farm in rural Virginia a decade ago, he and his wife were startled by the sounds of 20 hunting dogs barking and howling as they circled their house and chased their chickens.

When Medeiros confronted a hunter nearby, the man told him he had permission to hunt on Medeiros’ property. In disbelief, Medeiros called the agency that enforces a state law allowing hunters to retrieve their hunting dogs from private property, even when the property owners object.

“He told me, you can't prohibit people from coming onto your land,” recalled Medeiros.

He then pointed out that his land was posted with no trespassing signs.

“I said, 'You don't understand. My land is posted,'" Medeiros said.

“You don't understand," the official responded. “You can't stop them.”

After years of putting up with baying dogs and dead chickens, Medeiros and several other property owners are suing the state over its “right to retrieve” law, arguing that allowing hunters to go on their property without permission amounts to an uncompensated taking of their land and violates the state and federal constitutions.

A number of states allow hunters to retrieve their dogs without permission from property owners under certain circumstances, such as properties that do not have “no trespassing” signs. But Virginia's law says hunters are allowed to retrieve dogs even when the property owner has specifically denied access.

A 2016 report prepared by the Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries, (now the Department of Wildlife Resources), said only one other state, Minnesota, had a similar law. Minnesota's law says a person can enter private land to retrieve a hunting dog without permission of the owner, but cannot have a firearm when doing so and must immediately leave after recovering the dog.

The Virginia property owners are suing the Department of Wildlife Resources, which enforces the law. They are represented by the Pacific Legal Foundation, a conservative legal organization that won a major property rights case at the U.S. Supreme Court last year. The high court found that a California regulation requiring agricultural businesses to allow union organizers onto their property for up to three hours a day, 120 days per year, amounts to the government appropriating “a right of access to private property” and “constitutes a per se physical taking” under the court's precedents.

Private property owners sue over Virginia's hunting dog law

I know the area.....Dog hunters are real assholes with a total disregard for property rights.
Why doesnt the land owner just shoot the dogs?
 
Why doesnt the land owner just shoot the dogs?
That's what I would do. I had two viscious dogs in my backyard and I called animal control. They came out with a cop and got them and I thanked and them and the cop told me they were very busy and if I get anymore dogs like these on my property thay I might have to shoot them if they were unable to respond. I told him I didnt want to shoot a dog unless I had to but I would if I thought they were gonna hurt me. He said do what you have to do.
 
So you're saying shooting the dogs might get you into feud with them? That seems strangely appropriate given thats Hatfield/McCoy country isn't it?
 
So you're saying shooting the dogs might get you into feud with them? That seems strangely appropriate given thats Hatfield/McCoy country isn't it?
Possibly.....Nobody wants to lose livestock/equipment over shooting a fuckin' dog. The best thing the landowners did was band together and go after the state over the issue.

That place is right around Ft. Pickett, just west of Petersburg, Virginia so no where near H&M territory.
 
I have seen them get into a knife fight over who's dog jumped the deer first.
 
It's legal here too but most folks really don't want to shoot a dog. They just don't want them running across their property.

How it works is you have lead dogs, the rest are just "noise makers" and those are the ones that are likely getting into the livestock. The lead dogs are trained to return.

Lots of times the hunters don't really care where the noise makers end up.....back in the day the county would set-up pens at country crossroads in the "dog hunting counties" to stick the noise-makers in and the "owners" would come by and load up what was needed for the next hunt.
Same here, really. I've been out with a bunch of you dogs, easily distracted though and the pack mentality can come out, to it is an option. Getting into the chicken yard would get it used than any other thing I can think of.
 
Unless you live in a dog hunting county and have had dealings with them you would not understand.....Fuckin' dog hunters are a couple cans shy of a six-pack.
I have nothing against dog hunters

But if their dogs are causing trouble on my land shoot the dog
 
It sounds like a B.S. story. I live in rural Va and the local authority says that I can legally kill any dog or any other animal that I find on my property molesting my stock or pets.
 
It sounds like a B.S. story. I live in rural Va and the local authority says that I can legally kill any dog or any other animal that I find on my property molesting my stock or pets.
That's not in question. What they are suing over is our retarded retrieval of hunting dogs law.

In other words entering posted property without the landowner's permission in order to retrieve hunting dogs.

If you think that is messed-up check out the laws protecting fox hunting and their dogs.

About all we have in my AO are a few coon hunters but I've never heard tell of any issues with those except from the transplants on their little 10 acre or so "farm-etts" and that's just because they have not been schooled yet, the local game warden or the locals usually straightens them right out.
 

Forum List

Back
Top