So I like the rest of you I have read the posts about the DCNR setting up road blocks and searching vehicles etc. This post is not about if those events are taking place but rather if those search powers should be changed or redefined on public highways and WMA. I understand that by hunting on WMA you consent to search of your vehicle as you do when entering a military base but what about if you are just crossing a WMA. The club I am member of has property leased that you actually must cross WMA land to access. My questions are below I am curious what the members here think and if they believe if DCNR currently violates probable cause.
1. Should DCNR search powers be refined?
a. On state highways public roads etc.
b. WMA
2. How should these powers be refined if so
3. Is it possible to generate a ground swell to cause these powers to be refinded by the state legislature.

The 4th amendment is not something the DCNR or even the state or Feds can just change on a whim.

If you're on a WMA, you should expect to be treated like everyone else there. The LEOs not going to know who is passing through or actually hunting the WMA. That's what I would expect anyway.

Agreed however if any of the recent stories are true then they are clearly violating the 4th amendment either through ignorance by those submitting or blatant disregard by the officers. Therefore, is there benefit in having the state legislature address those actions specifically.

Several post have been made in regards to search of vehicles on WMA's as a term of use. Is this true and if so can this not be revised by the state legislature?

Any of the legal minds around here have any case law to reference?

If they do, you'll be lucky to see a response because some Jack Leg who watches Law and order will tell them they are wrong.

There's a nuclear genius on here that knows all laws on all things.

He is the law!!!

the fourth amandment doesn't need state law to make it clear.

This is my humble opinion. It used to be that when hunting, one of the conditions of the state letting you hunt their game was that you were automatically consenting to letting them search any area you could hide game. Since a quail is pretty small, basically anywhere.

HOWEVER, hunting is no longer a privilege, but a right granted to us by our state constitution. In my mind, this is a game changer. The State can't put conditions on our rights except in narrowly defined instances, such as reasonable limits to Open Carry. I can't think of a recognized exception to the 4th that would allow unfettered game searches anymore. It used to be consent, but I predict that will change with a court challenge eventually.
Having said all that, I hope I am wrong, which is highly possible, and it doesn't change. The GW's job is tough enough without making it harder. Remember, GWs are LEOs and have to follow the same civil rights as any other LEO, our obtaining a license, and therefore our consent to search is what gives them more leeway than any other officer on a search.

Now, if some sharp legal mind can make the consent when hunting a narrowly defined issue, which they may can do, we be back where we are.

Truth be told, they stalk the interwebs and they're using the location sharing from the Game Check app to triangulate our locations. All those dumb SOBs that admitted they'd trespass in the "what would you do" thread better watch their backs. Ol green jeans is watching.

The only reason I agree to searches by the GW is because I know I don't want the "check that prick" bullseye on my back for giving the man a hard time.

I don't know what it is now but I don't think they should be allowed on private land without probable cause that something illegal is going on. By that I don't mean they can say that someone told them something might be going on. They should have to have a paper signed by the person tipping them off.

They can apparently do whatever they want on a WMA. Years ago i was about to go bow hunting in the Bankhead and was just getting my stuff ready at my truck when two wardens came up and wanted to see my licences. No problem, but soon they had me spread eagled against the truck patting me down and searched all through my truck. they didn't find anything wrong but I was so pissed I didn't hunt. I won't be treated like a damn criminal just for the privilege to hunt on the king's land.

Google Open Field Doctrine. Any LEO can go on any land for any reason, gated or not, without a warrant. This doctrine does not extend to a building or its curtilage.

I figured that was what it was but I don't think it should be. At least not unless they have reason enough to have something in writing.

I can't just go snooping around the neighbor's property to see if I can find anything interesting,and I don't think LE should be able to either.

X 1,000,000,000!!!!!!

There used to be a statement in the reg book about you had to be willing to open your coat or vest when hunting. I can't remember the exact wording; I don't think it's in there now.

I certainly have no problem with handing my vest to a GW on a dove hunt or something. And no problem showing my harvest record if I have antlers or deer blood in the truck. But having my truck searched because I look like a hunter doesn't seem reasonable to me.

For many years now I have avoided dressing like a hunter when traveling on a hunt. I prefer to just look like an old man driving down the road.

I'm no legal expert, as a forewarning.


The way I read it, it's on the books saying that you can refuse a search, but the act of refusing to consent in and of itself is a punishable offense.

You mean off a WMA? If so, nope, nada, not legal not true.

You ever heard of a GW being trespassed off of a property? Not sure trespassed is the word to use but he couldn't go back on it. You know the GW and where the property is.