This is probably a stupid question, but what determines where they go on any given day?

I was eating lunch in Jones Valley yesterday and two of them were eating at the same place. It just got me wondering. Do they have regular patrols, or just go where they get calls? Or both? With so few covering such a large area, I would imagine that would be difficult to do.

They've got to be going on something. I doubt they just drive around. But I also doubt they'll tell you why they do what they do.

When I hunted dope for the county, often the GW's and sometimes ABC would come with me...GW's looking for baited fields, ABC looking for stills.

GW made some good cases by photographing fields that arrestee's later claimed they had grown the corn in then mowed it down. I remember one guy that argued in court that the corn was grown in place. GW produced pics he took in the summer when we were there, about 5 stalks of white corn growing in a couple acres, then pics of when the guy was arrested, whole field carpeted in yellow corn. Judge gave the guy a couple chances to backtrack, then found him guilty of baiting AND contempt of court, for lying (and probably just being stupid).

Because GWs can go into any property without a search warrant, I suspect other LEO agencies love to have them around.

They will TELL you they spend a lot of boot leather looking for bait but I suspect they find more from friends and neighbors telling on people than what they just "stumble" across.

My girlfriends uncles were both very high up Alabama gamewardens

Any agency can go onto any property a GW can. The Open Field Doctrine is not exclusive to any particular agency. If I wanted to search a bag with no warrant and said I was looking for evidence of game from hunting, I'd have the same authority to do so as a GW. Hopefully, no officer would try that though because everyone would see through that. Generally speaking, GWs are the only ones that enforce game laws but police officers and deputies could if they took a notion, which would probably be against their agency head's wishes.

The agents that officers like to have with them are Parole/Probation officers because when granted parole or probation you consent to have your house searched by an PO at anytime for any reason.

Thanks for the clarity, jawbone. I'd been told specifically by a law enforcement officer that he and his department loved having the GWs with them "because they can go anywhere, look around for any reason and then let us know what's there so we can bust people."

Jawbone you have to have actual probable cause to search a bag you know that pesky 4th amendment prevents unlawful search and seizures. I guess you could but any evidence would be throw out in court w/ any lawyer worth a dang.

Game wardens can ask to see what's in your game bag or other areas (like a cooler in a truck, livewell in a boat, etc.) at any time for any reason.

Incorrect, sir. Not for game wardens, or law enforcement looking for game. I don't really agree with that, but I don't make the rules.

Nope. Only if you are hunting, fishing or they have evidence you have been doing one of those activities. They can't just stop you going down the road and ask to look in your cooler.

220-2-.12 Game Bag, Hunting Coat, Etc., Shall be Open to
Inspection

(1) Pursuant to the Code of Alabama, 1975, Sections 9-11-259 and 9-11-
85, which provided in effect that all game birds, animals or fish taken or
killed in this State must at all times be carried or transported openly and
that all game birds, animals or fish carried or transported in an illegal
manner shall be confiscated and disposed of under regulations by the
Commissioner;

any live box, holding box, game bag, hunting coat, camping equipment, or like receptacles, or any automobile or boat used for the carrying or holding of any fish, game birds, or game animals or any gun or fishing tackle used in hunting or fishing shall be subject to inspection by officers of the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources at all times upon proper identification of said officer.

Any person who refuses to allow inspection of the above named articles
shall be in violation of this regulation and shall be punished as provided
by law.
_________________________________

Well, yeah. Reference the Barbour County (Macon? Bullock? All?) traffic stops in a prior thread this summer.

Better check out the laws concerning enforcement of Game and fish laws. GWs can search any bag which may contain game and thus, any law officer, while conducting a Game and Fish investigation can conduct said search of bag. Like I alluded to earlier, the problem they will have is explaining what they were doing conducting a G&F search and "happen" to find other contraband. Ricky's going to have a lot of spaining to do on that one and I would imagine it would be for naught. But if, they were conducting a legitimate G&F investigation and could convince the court it was legit, it would fly.

Legitimate is the key word there. They would have to have probable cause to conduct an investagation.

???

Our definition of what an investigation must differ. For 30 years I have conducted investigations in order to obtain probable cause not wait for probable cause before I investigate.

Unfortunately, there are bad apples in all law enforcement trying to find PC to search when none exists. I'm sure the majority of game wardens do the right thing and use their powers for legitimate investigations involving game animals and crime like poaching. However, there are also shady ones looking to get activity and try to pull a fast one on an unsuspecting citizen who has done nothing wrong and doesn't understand the GW has no PC to search. Most people who have done nothing wrong will gladly show their bag or cooler off when they don't have to. Know you're rights.

Damn, man. You've been doing it wrong for 30 years! C'mon!

It's not merely a GW's request because he wants to. It's in the Code of Alabama that if he asks then you must show.

Complain, debate, don't show him or whatever. But when you decline to open your livewell while out on the lake fishing or don't offer your game bag/vest/cooler when you're in the field hunting doves or coons or frogs, it ain't going to end well for you.

I do see a debate in this though. Think about it this way, you must consent to a breath test if ordered to, which is considered a form of search, because when you drive on a public road, which is a privilege granted to you by the state, you have consented to this search. It is called the Implied Consent Law. On the other hand, when you hunt, which is a Right granted by the State Constitution, you are also agreeing to a form of search. There is a big difference between a right and a privilege.

While I'm glad it is this way for the sake of enforcement, I could see some issues if the right person were to start challenging it.

Sure if you're hunting or fishing or towing a boat or something that leads GW to believe you were doing something illegal. But if I'm driving back from the grocery store in a truck with a cooler in the bed full of groceries driving the speed limit, GW has nothing. He is just like any other LEO. I'm traveling on a road from the store without hunting or fishing gear at the speed limit.

lot a GW experts on here that know somewhere between zero and nothing about GWs or laws.....

Right on the money Jawbone. Driving is a privilege not a right. Same thing in FL you agreed to implied consent when you signed your driver's license. It's actually printed on FL license. Probably on AL too I would think. If you don't blow you're license is suspended. But a GW stopping me coming back from the grocery store with no hunting or fishing gear or boat when traveling the speed limit just doesn't fly with me. No agency can stop you because they feel like it. Now going to hunting camp or towing boat or other signs I might have game animals or fish I could see. That makes sense. Not breaking the law and not engaged in hunting or fishing Because GW feels like it I cannot.

Please enlighten us. What's the real deal in your state? You're word I'll take as gospel.

I ain't no damn game warden....

and exactly what was the pre/post derailed question????

More of a statement ... basically that the 4th Amendment protects hunters/anglers from having to show the GW anything upon request.

That goes for plenty of topics on here.

That does bring up a good question, Troy. With Implied Consent your license is suspended for not complying, but what happens if someone refuses to turn over their game bag for inspectionon a dove shoot for instance, what repercussions do they face? Are the current GWs going to forcibly take it from them and is there a separate charge for this? I know what was likely to happen in the olden days when we were young, but I'm talking about modern times.

In the "hunters are customers" era?

well....thanks for the info guys....?

Jawbone implied all LEO's can stop and search for no reason not just GW this is not correct. You may have done it for years but have been lucky to not have been challenged. I have been asked by LEO's to be searched and have flat out denied and guess what I wasn't searched neither was my car. I even waited for 1 hr for them to get a dog and circle the car and nothing so guess what they couldn't search my car. Know your rights. Now a GW is different ball game that I don't have experience with but I know for a fact other LEO's have limitations on what they can do. Road blocks are also tricky depending on what state. Some states have to post where the road blocks are a day in advance which covers them on consent to being searched.

I just wanna know why they dont have to wear orange if its for everyones safety

GWs have no more general search/siezure authority than any other LEO EXCEPT when you are on a WMA. A GW can search your vehicle on a WMA just because he feels like it at the moment. I lost several good drug cases because my asst DA didn't know of this law and threw out several of my cases because she couldn't see any probable cause for the initial stop.

Jawbone, failure or refusal to allow inspection of game bag/game/ etc would result in an arrest for failure to allow inspection..and the inspection would take place or somebodies arse would go to jail.

back to the pre question. Most of the time a GW sets his own work times per day depending on time of year, complaints, what his partner wants to do, etc. Sometimes GWs have their work plan laid out by a supervisor or Montgomery office, but not too often. It takes a real self starter to do that job well.

With all due respect, I believe I'm a little more well versed in the subject matter than you. And I certainly don't get your first line because that is far from what I said. Try going back and re-reading.

Thanks BhamFred. Thats a job that has always interested me.

Dam this is turning into a Hunter's Life Matter thread.

I took a picture of my new boots next to my 9 month old boots a year or so back...not only did I wear the leather out, but the rubber soles too.

It is absolutely RARE that I get a tip on someone baiting. During the 2014-2015 season I didn't even have one bait complaint...but I still found it by walking. Some counties may get a lot of bait tips, but not my county.

As for the original post...I make my own schedule most every day. I know where I'm most likely to run into violations, where I need to focus my attention, and at what hours I need to be out there. But that's not to say I can do it all by myself. Night hunting and hunting without permission are two of the violations that the general public's calls and tips really help out. I can't cover every county road in Cullman every night, but with good information I can put myself in an area where I have a better chance to nab a poacher.

Thanks!

Ok, I think I know the answer to this...but do GW's do ridealongs? I know you can do it with Police Officers.

Only if you wear orange.

Depends. We offer internships for juniors and seniors in college, in a degree program that would be related to being a game warden(wildlife management, criminal justice, ect.). We also have 1 day job shadowing opportunities for high school students interested in the job. Our district offices set all of these up, so if someone is interested they need to contact the district office for thier area. I will say that interns learn much more about the job than a 1 day job shadow. But neither one really get to have a "game warden" experience, just due to the fact that we can't take non-Leo's on private property where we spend much of our time.

Y'all be safe out there Jon.

Awesome. I have a friend that is interested in some line of that work. Ill let him know.

Maybe I read wrong Jawbone but in your first post you alluded to any LEO being able to enter a property or search a bag without a warrant or consent all the officer would have to say is he was checking for game violations. Which if that's the case I believe you would be wrong. But if not I apologize.

He's not wrong. The open field doctrine allows LEOs to go anywhere upon private property. They have to have a warrant to search any buildings or dwellings on property.

All firearms, bags, coolers, vessels and vehicles used in hunting can be searched for illegal or legally taken game animals. Failure to submit for inspection is a crime.

What he said, but I didn't know there was a separate statute for failure to submit to an inspection until Troy told me so. To be clear though, the search that we are referring to is limited in its scope to looking for taken game and fish.

I'll add one more tidbit. The warrant requirement for searches of buildings and dwellings also includes the curtilage of the building, but what is in the curtilage is often in plain view so no warrant is needed in those instances.

B-ham Fred, you just like to exaggerate. You tend to piss people off on this site on a regular basis as you should probably know. I would say for the folks on this thread that are not attorneys or Leo's they appear to have a general idea of how the 4th amendment controls these situations, and better than most. I would say one or two actual lawyers have chimed into this thread and have given pretty good advice. Bottom line, GW's have more latitude for conducting searches on game and fish offenses than regular LEO's do for regular criminal offenses. Lower 4th amendment hurdles for game wardens.

I thought it was funny.

What is between zero and nothing? Any room for a smidge?

Sounds like most cops from my experience.

this is also true Scott

actually I was leaving you and Jawbone out of my post.....and maybe one er two others.

maybe a small smidge....

GW's can not just go on property without a search warrant.

Some of you are not reading anything in this thread. Any LEO can go onto property according to the open field doctrine. This has already been discussed several times in this thread.

So what you are saying is, GW's can't do anything without a police officer holding their hand, and they need 4 search warrants....?

They have to have a 4th Amendment Probable Warrant Thingy written in pokeberry before being able to look at property.

I want to add that most law enforcement agencies reserve the open field doctrine for cases where they have probable cause to enter said property. For example to investigate a complaint or apprehend a suspect, etc. the exception to this is GWs, because the very nature of their job is to apprehend game and fish violators. So in order to do that they put boot traffic in to find areas where it's likely game and fish violations are taking place. No warrant is needed to do that.

Yes they can....

There is no law that says law enforcement has to have a warrant to go on to property. Read up on the Open Field Doctrine.

I love how DCNR employees who do this for a living and attorneys who know the law are told they're wrong.

more expertise that just fits the subsmidgen intelligence level......

Thank you for setting all the armchair lawyers straight. Generally speaking police officers or deputies just don't go wandering around on property without a reason to be there, but they can do so legally if they took a notion. For example, we had an anonymous call one day that there was a Mary Jane patch in the big vacant lot off of Rodgers Street. An anonymous complaint does not give you probable cause in and of itself. But through the Open Field Doctrine, we went to the lot (maybe 15 acres) and sure enough right out in the center was about 30 of the prettiest green plants you've ever seen. No idea whose plants they were but we ruined their party plans.

How else are they going to find those Yeti coolers to sell?

Throw your corn out in front of your stand and keep believing that. make sure to ask him for his search warrant when The Man gets there.

This is a very interesting thread. I'll Google the open field doctrine and read up in it because I had never heard of it until now. Can someone explain the difference in when an LEO can search your vehicle or dwelling vs when a GW can search your vehicle or dwelling? I really don't k ow more than a smidge about all this

this is a sad sad world. there are people on the site that are GAME WARDENS, POLICE OFFICERS and even a LAWYER telling you they DO NOT have to have a search warrant to come on to your property and you still refuse to listen

They don't actually refuse to listen, they just prefer to continue to argue....

''Open Fields.'' In Hester v. United States, 265 U.S. 57 (1924), the Supreme Court held
that the Fourth Amendment did not protect ''open fields'' and that, therefore, police
searches in such areas as pastures, wooded areas, open water, and vacant lots need not
comply with the requirements of warrants and probable cause. Invoking Hester's reliance
on the literal wording of the Fourth Amendment (open fields are not ''effects'', the Court
ruled that the open fields exception applies to fields that are fenced and posted., in Oliver
v. United States, 466 U.S. 170 (1984). ''[A]n individual may not legitimately demand
privacy for activities conducted out of doors in fields, except in the area immediately
surrounding the home.'' Id. at 178.
An individual cannot demand privacy for activities conducted within outbuildings and
visible by trespassers peering into the buildings from just outside. United States v. Dunn,
480 U.S. 294 (1987) (space immediately outside a barn, accessible only after crossing a
series of ''ranch-style'' fences and situated one-half mile from the public road, constitutes
unprotected ''open field'').
Activities within the curtilage are nonetheless still entitled to some Fourth Amendment
protection. The Court has described four considerations for determining whether an area
falls within the curtilage: the proximity to the home, the presence of an enclosure also
surrounding the home, the nature of the uses to which the area is put, and the steps taken
by the resident to shield the area from view of passersby.

United States v. Dunn, 480 U.S.294 (1987) (barn 50 yards outside fence surrounding home,
used for processing chemicals, and separated from public access only by series of livestock fences, by
chained and locked driveway, and by one-half mile's distance, is not within curtilage).
Naked-eye inspection from helicopters flying overhead contravenes no reasonable
expectation of privacy. Florida v. Riley, 488 U.S. 445 (1989) (view through partially
open roof of greenhouse). And aerial photography of commercial facilities secured from
ground-level public view is permissible, the Court finding such spaces more analogous to
open fields than to the curtilage of a dwelling. Dow Chemical Co. v. United States, 476
U.S. 227 (1986).

The ones that know the law and survive it, day after day, are some tough SOB's.

§ 9-2-65. Powers and duties of game and fish wardens; powers and duties of director with respect to game and fish wardens.

(a) Game and fish wardens shall have power:

(1) To enforce all laws of this state relating to birds, animals and fish;

(2) To execute all warrants and search warrants for the violation of the game, fish and fur laws of the state;

(3) To serve subpoenas issued for examination, investigation and trial of all offenses against the law relating to game, fur bearers, birds and fish;

(4) To carry firearms as provided by law for enforcement officers when in the discharge of their official duties;

(5) To confiscate all game, birds, animals or fish or parts thereof which have been caught, taken, killed or held at a time in any manner or for any purpose or had in possession or under control or have been shipped, carried or transported contrary to the laws of this state, and game, fur bearers, birds, fish or parts thereof so confiscated shall be held as evidence in the court in which the defendant is held for trial; and, upon conviction of the defendant, said game, fur bearers, birds, fish or parts thereof shall be disposed of by written order of the court;

(6) To enter upon any land or water in the performance of their duty;

(7) To assist individual citizens, clubs, groups and organizations of sportsmen and conservation clubs by furnishing information and such other assistance as may be found necessary in the construction of fish ponds, the establishing of feeding grounds for migratory wild fowl, the planting of fish from the state and federal fish hatcheries, the reclaiming of stranded fish and the control of predators on useful forms of wildlife; and

(8) To perform such other additional duties as the Commissioner may direct.

Great read! That would be a good pocket reminder for any officer.
At least we got some comments that may clarify in future to prevent a good officer from losing their job! We need all the good ones we can get.

Could a GW show up at your house and look in your freezer to check your possesion limit without a warrant?

yes pretty sure all he needs is probable cause to come on in. but here in lies the issue. there is no law saying you can not have 35 wild turkeys in your freezer or 100 dove. there is no law stating how much food you can have at your house now in the field is a different story

In a nutshell everyone, no warrant is needed by any officer to conduct a search in a place that a person has no reasonable expectation of privacy. The courts will determine what is reasonable and that may not be the same definition that you have. It seems like this field of law is evolving every day as new technologies are developed and people are taking advantage of them.

NOT without your permission. A search warrant would be needed.

Whats in your freezer at home count toward your possesion limit? I've heard it both ways. If a person had a freezer full of crappie etc that were caught legally or even rabbits can he stock those in his freezer legally for future use?

They sure as heck do it in the keys during lobster season

you talking about a permanent residence or a travel trailer just pulled down there???? BIG difference.

Agreed

Have heard it both ways, too. Like with having multiple limits of ducks (dressed) other folks have given you, or squirrels-rabbits-fish.

Common sense will tell you it would work both ways. If it were up to me, once they are cleaned and dressed and just being preserved until time for cooking, they shouldn't be counted against your possession limit. But I only ever enforced a G&F law or regulation once in my career. I caught a guy that shot a deer at night on Grey Rocks Ranch on New Years Eve night one year, so what do I know?

Is this official advice...or unofficial advice?

Not advice, just an explanation of how the courts come to their conclusions in these matters. Does a person have an expectation of privacy where they are or where are storing something?

Well hell yeah. I wouldn't want some random person rummaging through my stuff. And unless I know the officer personally, he fits the description of a random person. No more, no less. I don't care what job he has.

Just like I wouldnt want some random person piddlin around my open field.

So this is is an official explanation of what will definitely happen in court?

I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but it doesn't sound like the courts would deem you as reasonable.

I'm not sure I know what you mean as official as I'm not an officer of the court, but my experience and education tells me that when it comes down to 4th Amendment search and seizure issues, the courts rule on the standard of did the aggrieved party have a reasonable expectation of privacy in the matter that is the issue?

Grey Rocks and Days Bend gave me plenty of good memories growing up!