Judge to man: Keep quiet during hunting season

[dracphelan]

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/latestnews/stories/092206dnmethunter.12f1a9a.html

ITALY - An Ellis County man has been ordered by a judge to keep the noise down on his property during deer season after he was found guilty of a misdemeanor charge of disrupting hunters.

An Ellis County jury found Galen Morris, 38, guilty on Tuesday of violating one count of the state Sportsman's Rights Act. He was found not guilty of a second, similar charge.

The judge in the case ordered Morris to make sure his children don't disturb hunters on a neighboring property by playing loud music or driving four-wheelers before noon or after 4 p.m. during deer season, which starts in November. Morris was also issued a $250 fine and a year of probation.

"I kind of got mixed feelings out of it," Morris said. "Basically what they're saying is, during deer season you got to keep your kids indoors. You could sneeze and scare a deer off."

The Sportsman's Rights Act makes it illegal "to intentionally interfere with another person lawfully engaged in the process of hunting or catching wildlife."

Peggy Carroll, part owner of a ranch neighboring the Morris property, said the court's decision is fair. She said she hopes the noise restrictions and threat of jail time will keep it quiet for the hunters who use her land.

I'm of 2 minds about this. On one hand, it is his property and he should be able to do what he wants (within reason). On the other hand, if this is a good ruling, the judge felt he was intentionally scaring away the deer and that affected people not on his property.

 

[Rumble]

I dunno. Frankly, if I were told to keep quiet except for a four hour window during the middle of the day, I'd be...ah...disinclined to acquiesce.

 

[Polishrifleman]

This is just crazy, I wonder if we have something like that here in Washington? I will have to look it up maybe I can put an end to all the road hunting with noisy Dodge Duramax Diesels driving circles around the countryside.

ordered Morris to make sure his children don't disturb hunters on a neighboring property by playing loud music or driving four-wheelers before noon or after 4 p.m.

School????? Weekends????? I think this is the extreme side of the law, this law was obviously placed to prevent PETA etc... from going into the woods in front of us hunters with bells and whistles and such.

 

[Erebus]

This is double edged, while it protects the hunters right to hunt it allows the gov to tell the land owner how to behave on his own land. As far as I'm concerned he should be able to make all the noise he wants on his own land. Especially during the day.

Anyone know if he can post no trespassing signs on his own land to keep the hunters off it? Can he legally refuse to allow hunting on his own property?

 

[XDKingslayer]

Was the guy doing it intentionally? That's the big one. Obviously there was enough evidence presented to have the system find him guilty of doing it intentionally. And making noise to intentionally disrupt hunting is childish, assinine, and obviously against the law.

We have laws like this for fishing in Florida. Good for the judge.

 

[Nightfall]

I used to see this differently, but I've recently come of the mind that unless the sound levels at the property line are of a decibel level capable of damaging you, it's your problem, not the creator's. Otherwise, you get stupid crap like this. I want to be able to see the deer on my front yard in the morning. So nobody is allowed to start their cars headin' for work, ya'll gotta push them down the road until the deer won't be disturbed. If there is a right to not have game disturbed by vibrating air, there's a right to watch a doe and her fawn eat my grass undisturbed, right?

 

[Master Blaster]

Nonsense, If a Judge and a neighbor pulled this crap on me. I would get my hunting gear on and go out at sunrise every morning Hunting, with the loudest rifle money could buy maybe a 300 win mag with a muzzle break. At 4pm I would hunt again.

After I hunted a bit missing those darn deer cause I'm a crappy shot, there would be no deer within 5 miles of the property.

How dare they tell me that I cant go about my life on my property cause the noise scares the deer away.

Peggy Carroll, part owner of a ranch neighboring the Morris property, said the court's decision is fair. She said she hopes the noise restrictions and threat of jail time will keep it quiet for the hunters who use her land.

Is this person going to be paying me for the use of my land??

 

[dfaugh]

Total BS. I should be able to do as I please on my own property, when I please (as long as it not causing a DANGER to others.) I hunt my own land as well, but would never consider complaining about what my neighbors are doing, on their own property, even if it interferes with my hunting activities.

 

[MechAg94]

This article sucks. It reads like an editorial. There is really no mentioned whatsoever of what the guy actually did to make this case go to court. Without knowing that, I really could not comment.

"Intentionally" is the key word regarding that law, but we don't know what the land owner intentionally did according to the judge.


Also, when it says "Italy" at the top, is that the name of a town? or did the web site screw up? It wouldn't surprise me if it was the town. I think Texas has a town with the same name as about any major city in the world.

 

[crucible]

I am a hunting supporter, though I don't myself.

That said. So what if this guy intentionally did much of anything on his land? It's his land to do it on. Can't drive vehicles on his own land during certain times? What the heck is that? Is he supposed to not walk "loudly" on his land as that can spook the deer too?

Give me a friggen break.

C-

 

[Jrsmith]

I agree that there is really no reason a Judge should be able to tell the man what to do on his land, especially noise wise... BUT

I will say that when my neighbor got his deer at about 8am on opening morning and spent then next 4 hours tooling up and down his fenceline with a four-wheeler, it was quite annoying, I was tempted to drive down there and drag his darn deer out myself. It is his right to do what he wants on his land, but he certainly ruined my opening day in doing so. (and he does this alot, we don't much care for him, I can't hunt on my favorite spot when he's up hunting, I have to move to a different spot.)

I think that problems like this should be solved in a civil manner by the neighbors, no need to get the law involved.

 

[NoPhilly]

This makes no sense to me

I don't understand how the laws can give more rights to visitors (the hunters) than to the property owner.

He can't be loud (because the deer might run off), but the hunters can make all the noise they want (in the form of gunshots).

That other poster's idea about "hunting" with an extremely loud rifle sounds like a good one.

*quoted myself because i wanted to add that I know almost nothing about the dynamics of hunting or the distribution of land in the area. Oh, and ATVs are extremely loud and annoying (almost worse than some of the bikes around here).

 

[ID_shooting]

This is a double edged sword. Yes, a owner should be able to do what they want on thier own land, that is a given. But if they are sitting on the edge of the property line intentionally scaring the game so I can't hunt them on my land, well, they are affecting what I want to do on mine. Doesn't that also violate my land-owner rights?

The difference here is intent I guess. If they are disturbing the neighbors intentionally, well they are wrong IMHO. I do know there is not enough information here to make the call iether way.

This does remind me of being young and some tree-huggers/hippies setup some land in the middle of prime hunting area, they would set out water, salt and grain to attract the deer to thier land during hunting season. Of course they posted the land so people could not hunt on it. Well, one side bordered Forrest Service land and a bunch of us got together and just picked off the deer as the animals were commong to or leaving the "haven" the tree-huggers set up. Many times, the kills took place right in front of them. I know it wasn't the right thing to do, but after two seasons, the hippies quit biating the deer.

 

[XDKingslayer]

Part of the problem is you guys are looking at it strictly as somebody doing what they want on their own property, but it's a little deeper than that. If the noise you are making is to intentionally disrupt my rights on either my land, or public land, then it's a problem.

This is no different than your neighbor blaring his stereo in the middle of the night keeping you awake just because he's a smacktard. I don't see anyone disputing those laws...

The guy isn't making noise or driving vehicles on his land for any other purpose than disrupting hunters in neighboring public land.

 

[xds&gsps]

I will have to look it up maybe I can put an end to all the road hunting with noisy Dodge Duramax Diesels driving circles around the countryside.

I hate to be nitpicky, but it is just the way I am The Duramax is in GM trucks not Dodge, the Dodge has a Cummins Diesel.

me if you must, I just had to put that out there, on the subject, I have mixed feelings about this, if this is unintentional noise I don't think that the ruling is right, it is his property he can do what he wants, however I have a neighbor with noisy dogs & I hate it I wish the court would tell him to shut his dogs up!

 

[Dmack_901]

I agree he should be allowed to fire guns, and ride four-wheelers, and do all that stuff. However, you don't have a right to send excessive soundwaves onto someone else's property. They make silencers, mufflers, headphones, use them.

 

[Geno]

Proof that one can NOT legislate nor mandate morality.

This ruling is proof that one can NOT legislate nor mandate morality.

Doc2005

 

[JohnBT]

Fort Worth Star-Telegram:

"ITALY -- It seems that Bambi's no fan of Eminem.

This winter, when four-wheelers have revved, air horns have blasted and the not-so-dulcet thump-thump of Eminem boomed from a home over to the grassy hunting flats next door, the white-tailed deer kept away.

Hunters who had paid lease fees for a good hunt on the property were not amused, and they turned to the Sportsman's Rights Act, a little-known law aimed at those who harass hunters."

Eminem? Isn't there a law against cruelty to animals?

On a slightly more serious note, another article mentioned racing vehicles, not just kids riding ATV's. I wonder if they even had mufflers.

 

[gunsmith]

one of the reasons

I would love to own property far away from everyone
is my desire to get concert size amplifiers and speakers
so I can shoot and listen to Metalica & the Ramones.
If I can't hear it a mile away, it isn't loud enough.

 

[TexasRifleman]

I don't understand how the laws can give more rights to visitors (the hunters) than to the property owner.

In this case the lady leasing the property to hunt is adjacent to the fellow in question here. If her livelihood depends on hunters paying her to hunt, and this guy is intentionally interfering with that then I can see why the judge would rule this way. It's interfering with her ability to earn a living.

Again, if it's intentional, which I suspect it was or it wouldn't have gone this far.

The Sportsman's Rights Act makes it illegal "to intentionally interfere with another person lawfully engaged in the process of hunting or catching wildlife."

 

[Car Knocker]

instead of noise he can simply burn garbage...

Probably a law against that.

 

[DRMMR02]

The problem I have with this whole situation is that it is HIS property. As long as he does not physically leave his own property where does the court get the nads' to tell him to shut up? Obviously this is rural land, and since when were there noise ordinances on farmland? Can he now not operate his tractors to disk his fields? Can he not operate his combine?

Why is his neighbors right to make a living from leasing her land out to shoot PUBLICALLY owned game more important than his right to the "peaceable enjoyment" of his property? (SCOTUS has ruled that peaceable does not mean quiet or peaceful, it just means not physically harming others).

Why is the ConAgra plant down the road not being cited. Or the rail roads? How about the municipal airport?

Utter crap to me, this seems. I would definitely defy this order and get my day in court.

However, if he wants to really screw with them this year, instead of noise he can simply burn garbage... Deer are not inclined to stay where there is smoke, as smoke means fire and death...

I totally agree. I live in the city, and there are noise ordinances for night time, but after 8am, I can do basically anything I want, play music, mow the lawn, use a sandblaster, chainsaw, etc. It's daytime. People do things that are noisy. So what. It's their property, and their decision. Even if he does it just to annoy the hunters(which I doubt he does) that's still up to him. He bought the land, he pays the taxes. Telling him he can't enjoy his own property by driving ATVs? That's ridiculous. As long as no real laws are being broken AKA no one is being hurt, his land his rules.

If there is going to be a daytime law against noise(which would also be stupd) it should apply to the hunters as well. What if he wants to have a cookout and doesn't want his family and relatives to hear gunshots all day?

I think our right as Americans to have domain over our property is every bit as important as the right to keep and bear arms. This judge is out of line.

 

[Zundfolge]

I hate to be nitpicky, but it is just the way I am The Duramax is in GM trucks not Dodge, the Dodge has a Cummins Diesel.

And Cummins gives money to anti-gun causes, so no good gun owner should be driving one anyway.


Frankly I like Master Blaster's response best. Would be a great excuse to get yourself a Barrett

I'm all for hunters having rights, but the non hunter here should have rights too ... if the neighboring property is so small that noise on Mr. Morris' property can have an adverse effect on the hunting then there probably shouldn't be hunting on said property as shooting guns in that close to homes is usually frowned upon.


At any rate this ruling doesn't help the RKBA cause any ... just makes hunters (and by extension gun owners) look like bullies that will use the courts to force others to bow to them.

 

[JohnBT]

I suppose it depends on how you define REAL LAW, doesn't it.

You know, there's a big difference between a few hunters taking a few shots during the day and bunch of kids racing unmuffled ATVs, blowing air horns and generally raising hell.

I appreciate quiet neighbors who only make as much noise as they need to and don't leave their barking dogs outside all day while they go to Wal-Mart.

John...noise pollution...every American's God-given right

 

[DRMMR02]

Well I define real law as laws that are on the books as just laws. Not a judges opinion that carries the weight of law. Real laws are voted on by the people. Not handed down by one man(or group of men) and forced on people.

And even if they are driving ATVs around, so what? He bought the land, he bought the ATVs, and he can use the ATVs on his land.