Page 1 of 2

The good, and the not so good

PostPosted: Wed Jan 01, 2014 10:58 pm
by Mean Gene
So, this morning I hauled my Aquapod marsh boat up to the Klamath River to hunt some ducks. There's a spot I knew about that is always full of birds this time of the year, so I figured that would be a good place to set up. Got there plenty early, got set up and had ducks landing in the decoys before shoot time. I had decided not to shoot buffies today since the spot usually held a lot of wigeon and mallards. Right off I had a pair of teal land 10 feet from the boat, which I had wedged in by a log and was using it as my blind. They swam right past the boat at about 15 feet, and never had a clue I was there.After that a mallard came in and I killed her. Before long a group of redheads started making their way down the river toward the decoys, feeding as they went. When they got close enough I killed a pair of them.

At that point the sun was just starting to peak over the hills and light up the far side of the river. I saw a couple birds and put the glasses on them. One of them was a nice European wigeon! I figured if I waited long enough he would make his way down stream and get close enough for me to shoot. That one would definitely be going on the wall. I layed still in that boat for 40 minutes while that rotten bird would swim down a few yards, then swim back up...swim down a few yards, then swim back up. At one point while I was waiting and hoping I had 6-8 wigeon in the river within 10 yards of me, and a hen mallard landed within 5 feet of me. The Euro never showed any signs of wanting to swim down. The mallard swam out in front of me toward the decoys, so I shot her, figuring maybe the Euro would fly down and give me a shot. Nope, he went straight up river. Oh well.

At that point I moved my little boat about 20 yards upriver and loded it in under a tree branch to get a little closer to where the birds seemed to be wanting to go. Pretty soon a wigeon locked up and came in, and I killed it.

And that friends, is where things got ugly. A truck and a car pulled up in the turn out across the river. The drivers got out and the guy in the car came up and started talking to the guy from the truck. He was telling him about hunting there and how to access the spot from the other side of the river. The guy from the car was the land owner I gathered. At that point the guy from the car stared yelling about hunters, walked to the edge of the river, looked at me and called me a stupid mother ****** and a dumb ******* hunter. Well that was interesting, I'd done nothing wrong. Nothing on that side of the river was posted, and it has never been closed to access. Then the car dude proceeded to scream that if I had gone in the river where he was I had crossed his land, and if that was my car down in the pullout he had my license plate number. He told me his horses were scared. I guess the guys he was going permission to hunt must have been planning on using silent guns? Then he and the truck dude had a laugh and drove away. He came back later and put up some no trespassing signs. However, what he never did at any point was to tell me to leave.

That's an important point.

Now, I don't know about you, but when I first see someone, and they "introduce" themselves by screaming and cussing at me, it really ticks me off. At that point I tend to become obstinate. Well, I decided that car dude hadn't told me to leave, and I sure wasn't going to cave in to a lunatic, so I just kept hunting. Wasn't long before I killed another wigeon, and here he came on his quad. He puffed up and asked if I hadn't believed him? Believing him or not wasn't really the point. I let him rant a bit and then introduced myself and explained that I didn't intend to be his enemy. I got him calmed down and he started explaining that he'd been running off folks who were shooting ducks they couldn't retrieve and doing some other not so good things. I asked about the guys he was talking to, and he said they were friends of his son. Still not sure why it's OK for them to scare the poor horses, but not anyone else? Upon further talking to him, he said he was planning on closing off the entire area...including the drift boat take out under the Klamathon Bridge. We eventually shook hands and parted ways.

Now, let's get back to his wanting to close the access under the bridge. This guy (from his conversation) has only lived here for 4 years. Folks have been taking drift boats out of the river under the bridge for MANY years. This guy is traveling a very, very dangerous road. If he closes off that river access it's going to cause a war. In this neck of the woods people have been burned out or died for less reason than that. I seriously don't think he has any idea how bad things could get for him. I would not want to be in his shoes.

On the way home I had a long conversation with a local warden. He said I was not the first one to call with a complaint about this individual. He said it's on his list to visit the landowner and go over the portion of the fish and game code relating to hunter harassment. Not a good situation at all no matter what side of the fence you're on.

From today:

Image

Re: The good, and the not so good

PostPosted: Wed Jan 01, 2014 11:13 pm
by R. Chapman
Sounds like a dick...That could have been one of those cases were you might need to call law enforcement, and have them deal with an individual like that.

Re: The good, and the not so good

PostPosted: Wed Jan 01, 2014 11:15 pm
by Mean Gene
R. Chapman wrote:Sounds like a ****...That could have been one of those cases were you might need to call law enforcement, and have them deal with an individual like that.


Had a long conversation with a warden on the way home. He said I'm not the first one to call on the guy.

Re: The good, and the not so good

PostPosted: Wed Jan 01, 2014 11:58 pm
by R. Chapman
Mean Gene wrote:
R. Chapman wrote:Sounds like a ****...That could have been one of those cases were you might need to call law enforcement, and have them deal with an individual like that.


Had a long conversation with a warden on the way home. He said I'm not the first one to call on the guy.


Even then, sometimes it takes them a while to do something about it.

Re: The good, and the not so good

PostPosted: Thu Jan 02, 2014 12:04 am
by assateague
I'm about to be "that guy". But here is my caveat: I'm not excusing his behavior in any way, shape or form.



That being said, if it's his land to post, then he gets to post it if he wants to, whether he's owned it for 100 years or 5 minutes. And if anyone tried to harm/damage/punish someone for posting their own property, I would back the owner, no matter how much of a shitbag. Why? Because personal property rights are very, very important. I don't care if someone's been using something since the beginning of time- if it's mine, and I decide I don't want people using it anymore, then that's my prerogative. There's really no difference whatsoever between him wanting to post a river access point on his land, and a homeowner in a development wanting to keep strangers out of their back yard. Private property is private property.

I hope you all get it worked out so it's favorable, but if he insists on posting it and somebody tries to mess with his stuff for doing so, I hope he shoots their ass. Because they deserve it.

Re: The good, and the not so good

PostPosted: Thu Jan 02, 2014 1:26 am
by sws002
assateague wrote:I'm about to be "that guy". But here is my caveat: I'm not excusing his behavior in any way, shape or form.



That being said, if it's his land to post, then he gets to post it if he wants to, whether he's owned it for 100 years or 5 minutes. And if anyone tried to harm/damage/punish someone for posting their own property, I would back the owner, no matter how much of a shitbag. Why? Because personal property rights are very, very important. I don't care if someone's been using something since the beginning of time- if it's mine, and I decide I don't want people using it anymore, then that's my prerogative. There's really no difference whatsoever between him wanting to post a river access point on his land, and a homeowner in a development wanting to keep strangers out of their back yard. Private property is private property.

I hope you all get it worked out so it's favorable, but if he insists on posting it and somebody tries to mess with his stuff for doing so, I hope he shoots their ass. Because they deserve it.


This.

You did the right thing by talking the guy down and introducing yourself to him. Best case scenario is he closes down access but still allows it to you. Shitbags have ruined good spots for all of us, just remember that the wardens don't own the access, the landowner does, having the warden on your side does you no good.

Re: The good, and the not so good

PostPosted: Thu Jan 02, 2014 2:18 am
by (MT)Montanafowler
assateague wrote:I'm about to be "that guy". But here is my caveat: I'm not excusing his behavior in any way, shape or form.



That being said, if it's his land to post, then he gets to post it if he wants to, whether he's owned it for 100 years or 5 minutes. And if anyone tried to harm/damage/punish someone for posting their own property, I would back the owner, no matter how much of a shitbag. Why? Because personal property rights are very, very important. I don't care if someone's been using something since the beginning of time- if it's mine, and I decide I don't want people using it anymore, then that's my prerogative. There's really no difference whatsoever between him wanting to post a river access point on his land, and a homeowner in a development wanting to keep strangers out of their back yard. Private property is private property.

I hope you all get it worked out so it's favorable, but if he insists on posting it and somebody tries to mess with his stuff for doing so, I hope he shoots their ass. Because they deserve it.


who knows how any situation like that can turn out in the end though, so many ways that it can play out.


I too hope it works out in the best way possible.

Re: The good, and the not so good

PostPosted: Thu Jan 02, 2014 8:16 am
by goodkarmarising
Now, let's get back to his wanting to close the access under the bridge.


Where you access the river, is it public access? If you are on the river and it is considered public land and access the river from public access, then the landowner can get bent.

Re: The good, and the not so good

PostPosted: Thu Jan 02, 2014 8:43 am
by aunt betty
I have had the same thing happen.
Ppl "playing game warden" harrassing me while in the field.
I simply ask to see their badge. When they shrug shoulders, I pull out one.
Its a sherrif's badge from Indiana but they never look.

Re: The good, and the not so good

PostPosted: Thu Jan 02, 2014 8:53 am
by Mean Gene
Never said he couldn't post it, said it has never been posted and has always been open access. Also not saying I would condone violence. I am, however, saying there are plenty of people here who are more than willing to make the guy disappear or burn him out if he ever closes that drift boat take out. Not saying it's right, just saying it's a very real possibility that he will have to deal with in the event his plans succeed. There's still a lot of wild west and shoot, shovel and shut up here. He can do whatever he wants, but I sure as hell wouldn't want to be in his shoes if he does.

I could access the river up stream, float down in front of his place, hunt all I want, then go back up and take out. I could do that all season, and there's exactly nothing he could ever do abut it. Will I? Probably not. I have other options and am not into starting range wars. But I could, and be 100% legal if I wanted to. Push will come to shove if he ever closes off that drift boat take out. Property rights don't mean much to dead guys.

After poking around more last night I understand from still working fire dudes that he's a pain in their ass. He's a pain in the F&G guy's asses. Later in the day I was parked by the river talking to a friend of mine and a couple of his friends came by. When we told them the story they shook their heads and got real sullen. "yeah," they said, "we know who he is. He's overstepping his bounds in a lot of areas." These guys were not choirboy types.

Again, yep, they guy has every right to post his land. No argument. But, he's pissing off everybody that has any kind of dealing with him what-so-ever. Eventually he's going to piss off the wrong people. The stretch of land in question is along the road, 10 feet wide and can never be used for anything other than walking to the river. It's been open since the dawn of time. Is it really worth putting your life on the line and alienating yourself from everybody for that? I honestly can't see the point.

Re: The good, and the not so good

PostPosted: Thu Jan 02, 2014 9:24 am
by aunt betty
Just tell The Man.
True story:
Stan Jones hunt club built a gate out of steel pipe that closed access to Rainey Brake on his side...
Within a week it was GONE.

Re: The good, and the not so good

PostPosted: Thu Jan 02, 2014 11:37 am
by one2many
Mean Gene wrote: Is it really worth putting your life on the line and alienating yourself from everybody for that? I honestly can't see the point.

YES
posted or not(iowa) private property is still private and trespassing can bad for your health.
the guy sounds like a dick but he is within his rights i would guess

Re: The good, and the not so good

PostPosted: Thu Jan 02, 2014 11:46 am
by (MT)Montanafowler
sounds like it could fall within the easement of the county road.

Re: The good, and the not so good

PostPosted: Thu Jan 02, 2014 6:12 pm
by one2many
(MT)Montanafowler wrote:sounds like it could fall within the easement of the county road.

thats a good point. i would look into that if its a place i like to go hunt

Re: The good, and the not so good

PostPosted: Thu Jan 02, 2014 8:41 pm
by banknote
(MT)Montanafowler wrote:sounds like it could fall within the easement of the county road.

That's what i was thinking but don't know the exact situation. Around here if you enter the river lawfully, then you have the right to use the whole river up to the ordinary high water mark. Not all land owners agree with it or like it, but that's the way it is and I think it's best that way.

Also, nice hunt! Too bad it had to get ugly, but at least you got to talk to the guy and keep it civil.

Re: The good, and the not so good

PostPosted: Thu Jan 02, 2014 9:22 pm
by Redbeard
Nice shoot Gene! Any Indians up that way? They'll burn him out

Re: The good, and the not so good

PostPosted: Thu Jan 02, 2014 11:04 pm
by 3legged_lab
I agree with you 100% Jim. It doesn't matter how long he's owned it, its still his.

one2many wrote:
Mean Gene wrote: Is it really worth putting your life on the line and alienating yourself from everybody for that? I honestly can't see the point.

YES
posted or not(iowa) private property is still private and trespassing can bad for your health.
the guy sounds like a dick but he is within his rights i would guess

And this too.

There's several places around here with private property access to a river and they charge a fee to use it.

Re: The good, and the not so good

PostPosted: Fri Jan 03, 2014 12:12 am
by Mean Gene
Again, I never said he didn't have the right to post it...never. Said I didn't understand why anyone would do it in a manner that would alienate them in such a small place as this. The real issue is not me and my marsh boat. That would come if he ever closed off that drift boat take out. It would essentially end salmon fishing on that section of river, something that has been done since the dawn of time. That would start the range war. There's not enough money in the world to get me to start that kind of war in a place like this.

Regardless, we have worked out a solution of sorts that will serve us both well. :thumbsup:

Re: The good, and the not so good

PostPosted: Fri Jan 03, 2014 12:31 am
by 3legged_lab
I know you're not saying he, as the owner, can't do so and I'm glad you guys came to an agreement that'll work for both of you. I bet if the guys that have been having troubles with him interacted with him the way that you did there wouldn't be any issues.

All I'm saying is, the "people have been using that property since the beginning of time" statement doesn't mean that people will continue using it to the end of time.

Re: The good, and the not so good

PostPosted: Fri Jan 03, 2014 12:35 am
by (MT)Montanafowler
3legged_lab wrote:I bet if the guys that have been having troubles with him interacted with him the way that you did there wouldn't be any issues.



nailed it. a lot of those guys get jaded by poor sportsmanship.

Re: The good, and the not so good

PostPosted: Fri Jan 03, 2014 4:12 pm
by one2many
glad you got things worked out MG.

Re: The good, and the not so good

PostPosted: Fri Jan 03, 2014 8:07 pm
by Mean Gene
As for it working out....yeah I guess it did:

Image

Re: The good, and the not so good

PostPosted: Fri Jan 03, 2014 8:17 pm
by assateague
:clapping:

That's awesome!

Re: The good, and the not so good

PostPosted: Fri Jan 03, 2014 8:24 pm
by JGUN
Save some for the rest of us!

Nice looking pile.

Re: The good, and the not so good

PostPosted: Fri Jan 03, 2014 8:33 pm
by rebelp74
Nice!

Re: The good, and the not so good

PostPosted: Fri Jan 03, 2014 9:55 pm
by banknote
Right on!

Re: The good, and the not so good

PostPosted: Fri Jan 03, 2014 10:30 pm
by QH's Paw
Wigeon are probably the best eattin' puddler.Image

Re: The good, and the not so good

PostPosted: Sun Jan 05, 2014 1:11 am
by Bootlipkiller
Nice limit gene

Re: The good, and the not so good

PostPosted: Sun Jan 05, 2014 7:35 am
by aunt betty
Wait til river floods, then tell the territorial farmer to get HIS water off everyone's land and send him a bill for damages...HIS RIVER.

Re: The good, and the not so good

PostPosted: Sun Jan 05, 2014 12:39 pm
by 3legged_lab
aunt betty wrote:Wait til river floods, then tell the territorial farmer to get HIS water off everyone's land and send him a bill for damages...HIS RIVER.

Check your reading comprehension, the land owner is not claiming to own the water, the state owns the water, he is claiming to own the access to the water.

Besides, screw the California Indians that claim to own the water in the Klamath river, it originates in Oregon, so we own it.