fuck pine island! and lawyers for that matter... inherited risk of going hunting with a gun. the world is f'd
I could sell that stump and move some yankees in.
Either write things worth reading, or do things worth writing.
seriously? That’s your take? If you believe something is flawed, misguided, or outright bad you really believe just don’t participate is the answer? Not sure why u r defending it based on a pr video meant to sway ignorant sheep. Whether I choose to participate is irrelevant. Calling it like I see it even after watching the informative video. What u call jumping to conclusions. If it’s such a great idea why not altruistic private land owners just do it themselves and leave the government out of it? Chew on it. I’ll wait so you don’t jump to any conclusions.
"Check your premise." Dr. Hugh Akston
Be proactive about improving public waterfowl habitat in South Carolina. It's not going to happen by itself, and our help is needed. We have the potential to winter thousands of waterfowl on public grounds if we fight for it.
I haven't defended it or bashed it. I don't know the details on it. Doesn't sound like you do either. If you do then share them.
There are plenty of things that government does that bother me. Getting upset about an arrangement to use private land for quota hunts doesn't make the list. At least not yet.
Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
First off, you would like to think that the landowner carries proper insurance (unfortunately many do not) that would include coverage for described incident. Secondly, the landowner should require to be named as an additional insured on the SCWP policy. Will they, who knows? Would I personally open my land up for this? Possible depending on the circumstances. I would be more inclined to help kids who didn't get drawn than I would adults. And my kid would NOT be there so the above described couldn't happen as described. Very picky who my kids hunt with.
Last edited by Sparkleberry Ridge Runner; 08-02-2019 at 11:20 AM. Reason: addition
Become one with nature then marinate it.
It may be that SCWP is technically a state agent which would kick in coverage through the Insurance Reserve Fund.
DILLIGAF
SECTION 27-3-30. Duty of care.
Except as specifically recognized by or provided in Section 27-3-60, an owner of land owes no duty of care to keep the premises safe for entry or use by persons who have sought and obtained his permission to use it for recreational purposes or to give any warning of a dangerous condition, use, structure, or activity on such premises to such persons entering for such purposes.
HISTORY: 1962 Code Section 51-83; 1968 (55) 3047.
SECTION 27-3-40. Effect of permission to use property for recreational purposes.
Except as specifically recognized by or provided in Section 27-3-60, an owner of land who permits without charge any person having sought such permission to use such property for recreational purposes does not thereby:
(a) Extend any assurance that the premises are safe for any purpose.
(b) Confer upon such person the legal status of an invitee or licensee to whom a duty of care is owed.
(c) Assume responsibility for or incur liability for any injury to person or property caused by an act of omission of such persons.
HISTORY: 1962 Code Section 51-84; 1968 (55) 3047.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Delta in a nutshell: Breeding grounds + small wetlands + big blocks of grass cover + predator removal + nesting structures + enough money to do the job= plenty of ducks to keep everyone smiling!
"For those that will fight for it...FREEDOM...has a flavor the protected shall never know."
-L/Cpl Edwin L. "Tim" Craft
Spellcheck sighting
"To the sensitive gunner nothing can equal a bird and a dog and a gun in trilogy."
George Bird Evans
You may be seeing more of me.
"Pass it on in the name of Conservation"-Tracy Byrd
Bookmarks