Results 1 to 35 of 38

Thread: CA Fish and game inspections

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    527

    Default CA Fish and game inspections

    Very interesting video, I'd love to see falconry inspections challenged one day. Thanks for putting this together.

    https://youtu.be/C_4Q0CBdCXk
    Eric Edwards

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Seattle, Wa
    Posts
    5,452

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ericedw View Post
    Very interesting video, I'd love to see falconry inspections challenged one day. Thanks for putting this together.

    https://youtu.be/C_4Q0CBdCXk
    Yikes. Thanks for the reminder of why I will never EVER live in California. Tough enough to go visit my wife's family down there for short periods.
    Geoff Hirschi - "It is better to have lightning in the fist than thunder in the mouth"
    Custom made Tail Saver Perches - http://www.myrthwood.com/TieEmHigh/

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    3,230

    Default

    This is Michigan's law on the matter. It sounds the same as California's doesn't it?

    "Inspections may be made without advance notice at any reasonable time of day. Inspections must be conducted in the presence of the falconry permit applicant."
    Isaac

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Santa Fe
    Posts
    771

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BestBeagler View Post
    This is Michigan's law on the matter. It sounds the same as California's doesn't it?

    "Inspections may be made without advance notice at any reasonable time of day. Inspections must be conducted in the presence of the falconry permit applicant."
    "Applicant" might be the key word there.
    John
    Still the finest hoods in Marshall.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Vermont
    Posts
    4,298

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by goshawkr View Post
    Yikes. Thanks for the reminder of why I will never EVER live in California. Tough enough to go visit my wife's family down there for short periods.
    Isn't that why the call it the "Left Coast"? With due respect to those who live there, CA may have better falconry conditions than I do here but it would never be on my list of places to move. Though our regs are pretty crappy here, our regulators are not blatantly in favor of using the constitution to wipe their asses either.
    Ron N1WT Vermont

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    CORONA CA
    Posts
    186

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rkumetz View Post
    Isn't that why the call it the "Left Coast"? With due respect to those who live there, CA may have better falconry conditions than I do here but it would never be on my list of places to move. Though our regs are pretty crappy here, our regulators are not blatantly in favor of using the constitution to wipe their asses either.
    Ron,

    It's not just the left coast... Does your state game department have the power to search private property without a warrant or probable cause? As far as I know all state game departments have declared the power to do so in falconry regulations. I am willing to bet that nothing in any state law authorizes such a violation of privacy.

    This is not strictly a falconry issue, administrative agencies of all types have overreached thier authority and created regulation that extends beyond the law. This is simply more repugnant in that it involves the rape of one of our core Constitutional rights.
    Troy

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Vermont
    Posts
    4,298

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WILL HUNT View Post
    Ron,

    It's not just the left coast... Does your state game department have the power to search private property without a warrant or probable cause? As far as I know all state game departments have declared the power to do so in falconry regulations. I am willing to bet that nothing in any state law authorizes such a violation of privacy.

    This is not strictly a falconry issue, administrative agencies of all types have overreached thier authority and created regulation that extends beyond the law. This is simply more repugnant in that it involves the rape of one of our core Constitutional rights.

    Troy,
    I am infuriated as much as anyone else about governmental overreach when it comes to privacy. I don't fear terrorists nearly as much as politicians and megalomaniacal law enforcement officials with paramilitary capabilities.

    Having said that, the court will support the position of CA F&W simply because when you sign up for the permit you are essentially giving permission for that search to occur. Signing up for the permit is somewhat akin to waiving your Miranda rights. I don't agree that you should have to grant that permission and waive your 4th amendment rights but that is another issue altogether.

    Unfortunately we live in a society which is increasingly willing to sacrifice their constitutional rights in an attempt to make someone else responsible for protecting them from the boogie man. I don't know how old you are but when I was a kid our television poked fun at the totalitarian Soviet and Nazi regimes with actors having bad accents saying "your papers please". It is unfortunate that we are moving in that direction and it is no longer funny. You and I are horrified by what is taking place while the vast majority of people are more concerned about the fact that they can't watch TV via 4G all the way to work.

    Ron
    Ron N1WT Vermont

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    3,870

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rkumetz View Post
    Troy,
    I am infuriated as much as anyone else about governmental overreach when it comes to privacy. I don't fear terrorists nearly as much as politicians and megalomaniacal law enforcement officials with paramilitary capabilities.

    Having said that, the court will support the position of CA F&W simply because when you sign up for the permit you are essentially giving permission for that search to occur. Signing up for the permit is somewhat akin to waiving your Miranda rights. I don't agree that you should have to grant that permission and waive your 4th amendment rights but that is another issue altogether.

    Unfortunately we live in a society which is increasingly willing to sacrifice their constitutional rights in an attempt to make someone else responsible for protecting them from the boogie man. I don't know how old you are but when I was a kid our television poked fun at the totalitarian Soviet and Nazi regimes with actors having bad accents saying "your papers please". It is unfortunate that we are moving in that direction and it is no longer funny. You and I are horrified by what is taking place while the vast majority of people are more concerned about the fact that they can't watch TV via 4G all the way to work.

    Ron
    Are you familiar with the frog in the cooking pot concept? Many of the changes we're seeing today didn't happen overnight!
    Dan McCarron
    John 3: 16

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    CORONA CA
    Posts
    186

    Wink

    Quote Originally Posted by rkumetz View Post
    Troy,

    Having said that, the court will support the position of CA F&W simply because when you sign up for the permit you are essentially giving permission for that search to occur. Signing up for the permit is somewhat akin to waiving your Miranda rights. I don't agree that you should have to grant that permission and waive your 4th amendment rights but that is another issue altogether.



    Ron
    I disagree since the Ca Supreme Court has already looked at this claim of authority by F&G as was stated in the video. Below are the findings of the CA Supreme Court Justice in People v. Maikhio:

    "Section 1006 is derived from former section 23 of the original Fish and Game Code as enacted in 1933 (Stats.1933, ch. 73, § 23, p. 396). Former section 23 provided in relevant part: “The commission shall inspect regularly (1) all boats, markets, stores and other buildings, except dwellings, and all receptacles except the clothing actually worn by a person at the time of inspection, where birds, mammals, fish, mollusks, or crustaceans may be stored, placed, or held for sale or storage....” (Italics added.) In providing for the regular inspection of the specified locations, former section 23 was evidently intended to authorize game wardens to conduct repeated inspections of places where fish and game were likely to be kept for sale or storage, and was not primarily directed at more ad hoc, in-the-field stops of noncommercial anglers and hunters by game wardens seeking the display of required licenses or any fish or game that have been caught or taken."

    There is no way a judge will find this authority is intended to search the homes and business of every citizen in the state without cause or warrant.
    Troy

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    NW Florida
    Posts
    570

    Default

    The date stamp is 2013 and appears to be as all States had.......open public meetings to the new State regs changing over from the Feds........so is this what is really is a discussion. Or a recent post 2 years old of New proposed Falconry regs that had to be made and adopted by Jan 2014. Also, most assigned permits allow for such inspections. It was also on the Federal regs and simply carried over.
    Joe N.

    Florida Panhandel

  11. #11
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    527

    Default

    Yea, I have a grasp of our falconry regs, past and present.

    I think the scary point of the video and statements made by the commissioners is that the CA Fish and Game is under the opinion that their right to unwarranted searches extends well beyond falconry, that they somehow are extended more power than Law Enforcement.

    It seemed to me that they believe if someone buys all necessary licenses to go deer hunting that they could show up on your doorstep the next day for an inspection.

    I understand the video is a few years old, just the first I had seen it. Scary stuff.
    Eric Edwards

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Live Oak, Florida USA
    Posts
    2,027

    Default

    I've joined this group: www.thecavalrygroup.com To protect our rights.
    Kitty Carroll -- The Hawk of May

    ~~ The essence of falconry is not in the flight or the kill,
    but man's relationship with his hawk --- Terance Hanbury White~~

  13. #13
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Nowhere
    Posts
    396

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hawkmom View Post
    I've joined this group: www.thecavalrygroup.com To protect our rights.
    Wish I knew about this group a few years ago.
    Scott Richter

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    CORONA CA
    Posts
    186

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by forensics View Post
    The date stamp is 2013 and appears to be as all States had.......open public meetings to the new State regs changing over from the Feds........so is this what is really is a discussion. Or a recent post 2 years old of New proposed Falconry regs that had to be made and adopted by Jan 2014. Also, most assigned permits allow for such inspections. It was also on the Federal regs and simply carried over.
    The federal regulations attempted to add inspections to federal falconry regulations, however based upon objections from the Americam Falconry Conservancy UFWS took the question to the Justice Department, the US

    Justice Department agreed that these federal inspections by USFWS are not allowed. In an attempt to circumvent this decision they simply added that the states must add this illegal search authority to be conducted by the states... Can anyone make sense of this?
    .
    Troy

  15. #15
    dboyrollz76 Guest

    Default

    A good lawyer could put them in their place. Honestly its just like the rest of the falconry regs. Just one cocky person with deep pockets could undo a lot!
    To quote Frank Bebee, the regulations that govern falconry do nothing to protect raptors but serve to protect the rights and privileges of special intrests groups.
    Until someone with resources dose something about it we are all subject to the bully. No matter where you live.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •