Montana I believe is a state that does not support administration searches. However, federal wildlife officers are NOT restricted by the state, and their interpretations. As such, you may want to search a state like California, or another that supports administrative searches.
In Oregon, fish & wildlife officers are all sworn OSP State troopers who specialize in enforcing fishing and hunting laws. The LE I had encountered was actively recording our conversation until we went off topic and started discussing hunting pressure in the area and the new 2026 deer units. He actually said "I'm shutting the camera off because we're no longer discussing any relevant infractions".
I get what you're saying, but as I stated earlier, in all my decades of hunting, fishing, hiking, backpacking, scouting... I have only run into 1 Richard of a Warden (a few times, his approach never changed), in the 80's. Every other encounter has been pleasant. From my perspective, it boild down to your reaction and behavior with the warden, with rare exceptions. But it doesn't matter what field of employment you look at, there will always be a few bad apples.
In Virginia siblings can marry parents. Serious as hell!Here's a question for members from W. VA. since it was mentioned:
If a husband and wife from W VA get a divorce, are they still considered brother and sister?
Eddie
I have a couple buddies that are cops. Each of them have said that one of the top five hardest part of their jobs is that you deal with the worst of society on a daily basis and you become jaded. Good cops have to put effort into maintaining a mentality that the people you’re dealing with are innocent. Some cops get a mentality that everyone is guilty of something and you just have to find it. Generally, the ones with the later mentality are the ones that people don’t like and while you shouldn’t/cant judge all cops because of a bad one…the perception is definitely dictated by the worst.
The Fishing for Evidence is good albit brief. I read it long ago. Anyone doubting the extent of search powers of wildlife officers should take a look at it.
No argument. Just providing easily searchable information. It’s a good starting place to look. Refining the search is certainly needed to drive toward black and white (as much as you can get anyway).
Here is a more recent one - "CONSTITUTIONAL LAW—FOURTH AMENDMENT SEARCH AND SEIZURE—WE’VE GOT OURSELVES IN A PICKLE: THE SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS’S RECENT EXPANSION OF FOURTH AMENDMENT RIGHTS MAY HAVE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES. Pickle v. State, 2015 Ark. 286, 466 S.W.3d 410" I almost didn't provide the link due to the typo in the title on the first page, but that wasn't in the article itself.
Did you read my Dorito story? They were Nacho Cheese and he still opened the bag. I would understand if it was Cool Ranch. I did nothing wrong. He also acted offended when I asked him if he wanted any since the bag was half full.
Perhaps he suspected the bag was one of the good ones with lots of extra seasoning?
Good point. That’s worth looking for.
From what I've read of that one (not finished yet, a physical search of the person, vehicle, gear... can still be done. It only limits criminal background checks, i.e , certian electronic searchs.
I can't speak to it - I read the first paragraph only.
