Wilsons, Virginia (AP) — He and his wife barked 20 hunting dogs shortly after Jim Medeiros bought 143 acres (58 hectares) of livestock and poultry farms in the Virginia countryside 10 years ago. I was surprised at the sound of howling and barking. They went around the house and chased the chickens.
When Medeiros confronted a nearby hunter, the man told him he had permission to hunt Medeiros’s property. Incredibly, Medeiros called a state law enforcement agency that allowed hunters to retrieve hunting dogs from private land, even if the owners objected.
“He told me, you can’t forbid people from coming to your land,” Medeiros recalled.
He then pointed out that his land was posted without signs of trespassing.
“I said,’You don’t understand. My land is posted,” Medeiros said.
“You don’t understand. You can’t stop them,” officials replied.
After years of enduring domestic dogs and dead chickens, Medeiros and several other property owners have allowed hunters to go to their property without permission to take unpaid land on their land. It violates the state and federal constitutions that are suing the state for its “right to recover” law, claiming to be equal to.
Many states allow hunters to retrieve dogs without the permission of the real estate owner under certain circumstances, such as real estate with no signs of “burglary.” However, Virginia law allows hunters to retrieve their dogs, even if the owner specifically denies access.
According to a 2016 report produced by the Virginia Department of Game Inland Fisheries (now the Department of Wildlife Resources), only one other state, Minnesota, has enacted similar legislation. Minnesota law allows you to invade private land and retrieve hunting dogs without the owner’s permission, but you cannot own a firearm and you must leave as soon as you retrieve the dog.
Virginia real estate owners are suing the Wildlife Resources Department, which enforces the law. They are represented by the Pacific Legal Foundation, a conservative legal organization that won major property proceedings in the US Supreme Court last year. The High Court requires that agribusinesses allow union organizers to enter their property three hours a day, up to 120 days a year. California regulations have given the government “access to private property.” Assignment, “Physical dosing” under court precedent.
Daniel Woislaw, a lawyer at the Pacific Legal Foundation, said he believes Virginia’s “right to recover” law is equivalent to a similar physical acquisition of private property.
“Jim has to get deer dogs and deer dog hunters into his property and is not allowed to tell them to stay away. And they kill his livestock and his When it interferes with activity, it is depriving the interests of valuable property, “Wythlow said.
The law itself was first published in the book in 1938, but the dog hunting tradition dates back to the colonial era, and owns eight hunting dogs, the chief executive officer of Virginia Hunting Dogs. Bear hunter Kirby Birch said the Alliance, a political action committee representing about 90,000 hunters in the state. According to Birch, most hunters are considerate of landowners and are trying to quickly retrieve their dogs when they reach private land.
“Many people who have moved here from other states are angry with the idea of hunting with their dogs, so it makes me sick when dogs run across my property. I understand that, but the vast majority of hunters who have dogs do it in every way so as not to irritate their neighbors. ” Birch, 75, who has been hunting with dogs since he was five, said.
Burch’s group estimates that more than half of Virginia’s 254,000 licensed hunters are hunting with dogs.
The proceedings require the court to obtain a plaintiff’s private property without public compensation, to violate the State Constitution and to declare Article 5 of the US Constitutional Amendment.
The legislature has made several attempts to overturn the law, Nothing was successful..
Ryan Braun, Managing Director of the Department of Wildlife Resources, declined to comment on the proceedings. According to Brown, the hunter and his private landowner were able to coexist peacefully for the most part, but as more rural land was developed and Virginia became more suburban. Two groups are loggerhead turtles over the issue of hounds..
“Hunters are very interested in protecting hunting dogs, and real estate owners are interested in protecting their rights as landowners, so both sides of the debate have a stake in it,” Brown said. Told.
“Both sides have been very passionate about their views.”