And yes I could see them enforcing either way. That there is an imperial valley code not a flyer that was misprinted. Something concrete for the wardens to hang the law on is all it takes. Here's a lesson way back when I took hunters safety the rule that was questioned was distance from a road or occupied dwelling and the answer was 50 yards only to be changed in regards to dwellings. The law now is 150 yards from a dwelling and had anybody made a point to inform the public several local citations could have been avoided. And yes any road with a county sign is 50 yards. They checked us to the foot up in Gridley last year .
state Fish & wildlive code vs local city.
- Thread starter longbowhunter2
- Start date
Gridley, as in Gridley up in Butte Co.?.....I have the state F & G Code book in front of me and can't find anywhere in it where it states 50 yds from a named road.....Does Butte Co. have this regulation as well as Imperial?
Thank you ghost and sprig for clarification on where the pigeon law came from, I for one will still not shoot pigeon until I get something in writing from someone in authority. Matt is out today and could have murdered the pigeons he bhad 5 dove when I talked to him at 7
This bill is very much related to this thread...........
AB 665 (Frazier) would help prevent cities, counties and park districts from adopting ordinances and other regulations which ban or interfere with hunting, fishing and depredation control activities.
This state bill, which is sponsored by California Waterfowl and is currently pending on the Senate Floor, was introduced in response to increasing efforts by local governments to bypass the State F&G Commission regulatory process and enforce their own regulations over the taking of fish and game.
Local efforts have especially targeted waterfowl hunting on state-owned public waterways, most notably San Francisco and San Pablo Bays. The local regulations are typically based on false public safety arguments, and in some cases clear anti-hunting sentiment.
While AB 665 is supported by a broad coalition of sportsmen’s groups, landowner associations and conservation organizations, it is being actively opposed by a number of local park districts, counties and animal rights groups.
Please help California Waterfowl pass this important piece of legislation by contacting your state representative now.
https://www.votervoice.net/CALWATERFOWL/Campaigns/42468/Respond
AB 665 (Frazier) would help prevent cities, counties and park districts from adopting ordinances and other regulations which ban or interfere with hunting, fishing and depredation control activities.
This state bill, which is sponsored by California Waterfowl and is currently pending on the Senate Floor, was introduced in response to increasing efforts by local governments to bypass the State F&G Commission regulatory process and enforce their own regulations over the taking of fish and game.
Local efforts have especially targeted waterfowl hunting on state-owned public waterways, most notably San Francisco and San Pablo Bays. The local regulations are typically based on false public safety arguments, and in some cases clear anti-hunting sentiment.
While AB 665 is supported by a broad coalition of sportsmen’s groups, landowner associations and conservation organizations, it is being actively opposed by a number of local park districts, counties and animal rights groups.
Please help California Waterfowl pass this important piece of legislation by contacting your state representative now.
https://www.votervoice.net/CALWATERFOWL/Campaigns/42468/Respond
Attachments
wackums back said:
OK....Some clarification from the Imperial Fish & Wildlife Commissioners meeting tonight......DFW Lt. King of Imperial Co. was asked where & why the pigeon law was put into the regulations in Imperial Co. He said it was brought down from Sacramento from DFW.....Commissioners of Imperial had nothing to do with it....He also noted that NO citations were written because of the law and he would try to get it taken out next year.....It was proposed and apparently accepted by DFW by Karen Feathergill (she does the dove banding in the IV). Really don't know how an Heritage Game Bird Coordinator could get this passed without some objection.
Again, If I were to get a citation for shooting rock doves, I would have no recourse, because this stipulation was approved and put into the regulations for Imperial Co.by DFW in Sacramento.
Here's a statement she made a couple of years ago and I do believe before it was actually in the regs.......
"Rock Doves, commonly called pigeons, are considered domestic only when they are being reared in captivity. Feral would be ones that were domestic and somehow released into the wild.
Rock doves in general are wild and regulated as non-game birds. Therefore, they cannot be "taken" unless under a depredation permit. These permit are issued only when requested and only with proof of property damage such as crop damage."
J
Josh Pearson
Guest
So it is in fact a law on the books and not a misprint? If so that means that even though it is not being enforced if a warden wanted to enforce it you could absolutely get a citation for it. Looks like you were correct all along Steve.
I've emailed Mrs fothergill and Lt king. I don't believe hearsay. Won't hold up in court. Might in the court of public opinion. Not in the real world. Thought this battle was over. Oh well I pulled out the big spoon and rubber boots . I'll stir the S&_t and wait for it to overflow.
J
Josh Pearson
Guest
Josh Pearson said:
Josh,
Not trying to be right or wrong. And would readily admit if I was off base.....I'm just trying to get a clarification or statement from DFW about what was/is written in the Imperial Co. Fish & Game regs. The explanation that was given last night at the commissioners meeting said a lot about where this came from and what would be done about it in the future.
ilovesprig said:OK, here's another one..... ;D
I talked to 2 old guys that said they were checked down by Heber. They had no problem, but the guys by them were given citations for being within 50 YARDS of a named/county road (and it was dirt). Lt. Joe Branna told me of this years ago. I also know that it used to be rarely, if ever enforced.....I mean I can only name about a 1000 spots in the IV, where people shoot within 50 yds of a named dirt road.....I probably did yesterday..... :
San Diego Co. and per DFW code, you can't shoot FROM or OVER a road (DFW code 3004). No mention of distance from the road itself.....I know Riverside Co. ordinance states 300 yds except for shotguns.....Talk about confusing..... :-[
Here's the Imperial Co. Ordinance.....
11.08.010 Discharge of firearms within fifty yards of any public highway.
It is unlawful for any person, other than a peace officer acting in official line of duty, to shoot, fire or discharge or for any person, firm or corporation to cause or permit any rifle, shotgun, pistol, revolver, or firearm to be shot, fired or discharged upon, along, across or within fifty (50) yards of any state maintained highway or county paved or unpaved maintained highway except when necessary to do so in protection of life or property. (Prior code � 51400)
Steve,
50 yards from a named county road in the IV they could write citations all day any day. All the heritage fields have at least 1 road as a boundry. Hell even some of the sites on Wister could get a citation Noffsinger, Beach
slinky_70 said:ilovesprig said:OK, here's another one..... ;D
I talked to 2 old guys that said they were checked down by Heber. They had no problem, but the guys by them were given citations for being within 50 YARDS of a named/county road (and it was dirt). Lt. Joe Branna told me of this years ago. I also know that it used to be rarely, if ever enforced.....I mean I can only name about a 1000 spots in the IV, where people shoot within 50 yds of a named dirt road.....I probably did yesterday..... :
San Diego Co. and per DFW code, you can't shoot FROM or OVER a road (DFW code 3004). No mention of distance from the road itself.....I know Riverside Co. ordinance states 300 yds except for shotguns.....Talk about confusing..... :-[
Here's the Imperial Co. Ordinance.....
11.08.010 Discharge of firearms within fifty yards of any public highway.
It is unlawful for any person, other than a peace officer acting in official line of duty, to shoot, fire or discharge or for any person, firm or corporation to cause or permit any rifle, shotgun, pistol, revolver, or firearm to be shot, fired or discharged upon, along, across or within fifty (50) yards of any state maintained highway or county paved or unpaved maintained highway except when necessary to do so in protection of life or property. (Prior code � 51400)
Steve,
50 yards from a named county road in the IV they could write citations all day, any day. All the heritage fields have at least 1 road as a boundry. Hell even some of the sites on Wister could get a citation Noffsinger, Beach
Mike,
I totally agree......That's what makes these county rules/laws be it from ordinances or from DFW, so hard to keep track of.....You're basically leaving it up to the LEO and his discretion on whether or not you're in violation..... :-[