https://www.facebook.com/groups/1500...2566480270817/
For those not on Faigbook
**Know your Laws** part two + PROGRESS
Your voices do count!
As mentioned, it came to the attention of CWS that there "might" be wardens writing tickets to "strictly" hunting observers so we reached out to the attorney at SCDNR for further clarification. I also prompted Senator Goldfinch and he promptly took up the cause.
A big thank you to you Stephen Goldfinch for always working to positively protect our hunting rights!
Read below for email sent and reply from SCDNR:
EMAIL SENT :
Ryan,
I hope this finds you well.
It has come to my attention that tickets have been written by SCDNR LEO to "strictly observers" while accompanying a deer hunter in a stand or otherwise on hunting grounds both public and private. Having worked as a SCDNR LEO I understand that this may or may not be the case. However, multiple examples have recently come forth pointing to a true ambiguity of the definition concerning hunting vs observer vs assisting and licensing requirements for each.
I have read : SECTION 50-1-20. "Hunters" and "hunting" defined.
The word "hunters" in the game laws of this State providing punishment shall not be construed so as to include persons who, without guns, assist others with dogs and horses or in the finding or retrieving of birds nor shall any such activity be deemed to constitute "hunting" within the meaning of such laws..
The above does not actually define hunter or hunting but only a very ambiguous area of exclusions not to be punished. Further , though it does mention birds, it does not in effect mention other game species leaving more confusion. Please clarify this if you will.
Further I have found that hunting is defined in the SCDNR regulation guide but can find no title 50 law to back up that definition.
As it reads in the SCDNR regulation book: hunting is defined as trying to find, seek, obtain, pursue or diligently search for game. Again, however I can find no SC title 50 code of laws to that same effect.
I do see that on July, 27, 1982, that the then acting assistant AG, Buford Mabry, did mention Virginia's definition of hunting but not that said Virginia definition was in adoption by SC neither can I find that definition as noted in SC title 50 code of laws.
Thus, in effect, if this is indeed the definition of hunting of which SC is enforcing then bird watchers, game watchers ,wild game photographers and those simply observing a hunt to see if they might be further interested in pursuing hunting would need a hunting license and be at risk of infraction.
Please provide some forthright and clear delineation on what SC is lawfully defining as hunting and where in SC title 50 code of laws such a definition can be found as to the definition of hunting.
Also and equally important please include the lawful delineation of the current action stance SCDNR LE is following in enforcing hunting versus observing versus assisting.
Respectfully,
David Strickland
Carolina Wildlife Syndicate
Lowcountry Wildlife Management
REPLY :
Good Morning David,
Thank you for reaching out. As you and I both know as former game wardens, this can be a grey area that involves a lot of officer discretion. Each situation is different and our game wardens have to rely on what they observe in each case. You are correct that the definitions of “hunters” and “hunting” in Title 50 are quite ambiguous. We rely on case law which has held that hunting is defined more clearly as stated in our Rules and Regulations publication.
I have spoken with Senator Goldfinch about the Title 50 ambiguity and we will be working with him to amend the statute to more clearly define the terms and explicitly list exemptions. Look for legislation to be filed in the upcoming legislative session.
Thank you for putting this issue back on our radar.
Take care,
Kevin
Kevin R. Ryan
Director of Government Affairs
Executive Office
S.C. Department of Natural Resources
Bookmarks