Game warden runs into rock on a section line. Farmer in trouble

Pages

434 posts / 0 new
Last post
Allen's picture
Allen
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 1/9/02

I am kind of at a loss for all those who want to string the GW up for "distracted driving".  His job is to watch out for illegal activities, I don't know why these hunters were in his sights, and don't really care.  However, I suspect GW's are trained to observe hunters as they approach them to be on the lookout for stupid things, like the ditching of lead shot in steel only areas, dropping of that extra bird into the tall grass, etc, etc.

As far as the degree to which some seem to think the GW is guilty of distracted driving, I hope like hell no big buck ever comes into view while you're behind the wheel out in the country.  Or some young blonde gal in town for that matter.

As some pointed out, others had to "drive around" the rock.  It wasn't that they had to stay on the 2-track trail to avoid hitting the rock, nope...they drove around it.  There is an expectation of a road, regardless of if it is 2-track or gravel, that the roadway is somewhat obstruction free.  Doesn't mean you can put your vehicle on auto-pilot, but at some level there is an expectation of there not having been an intentionally placed obstruction.  Especially if it is hidden in grass of sufficient height to make it difficult to see by even the most casual of observers.

Like many on here, I have mixed feelings about how this was handled as I just don't have all the details, nor the personal knowledge of the exact setting of the rock to the normal route of travel. However, I sure as heck can't find fault given with the GW's driving skills given what I understand about the situation.

Neither do I think ill of Mr. Bear at this point.

“Sometimes I wonder whether the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on or by imbeciles who really mean it.” ~ Mark Twain

johnr's picture
johnr
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 2/18/04

Db Said:
Negative comments:

First: ask yourself why they are made or the reason they are made by that person.

Second: what is the responds and what road do you want to go down.

Third: do you become detached or continue on.

Fourth: turn negative into positive,  the cup is indeed half full and not half empty.

I have found saying "you may be right" to end the discussion will usually either piss the person off more or make him/her feel good so we can go on to some other subject.
If it is a women they will be more pissed but a guy will usually then go on.

If it was me I would of said I had no ideal how that rock got there but either my grandfather working with horses put it there or God with the help of the ice must of drop it there.  Common sense in answering a question by a guy with a badge on. 
As a kid I did clean up a lot of section lines with the help of a WD-9 and a stone boat.  Now the section line is only a memory in a number of fields.
db

You block a public road to prevent someone from using it, you are a dick. Someone hits your road block now your a dick and responsible. If you put a rock near a road inadvertently shit happens, you are not a dick.

We all own the section lines, the closer you live to one does not constitute ownership of said section line

Neat

gst's picture
gst
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 3/12/09

allen, a couple simple non "personal" questions.

1. have you ever had to "drive around" a rock pile on a section line?

2. If you happened to be watching a pretty blonde gal riding her horse in the pasture beside where you are driving and you forget the "around" part when driving and run up on the rock pile, who;s fault is it you are sitting up on a rock pile with your pickup?
 
Think the wife will blame the pretty girl or the farmer who "obstructed" the section line with his rocks?

I would guess if I or you were watching a big buck or a pretty blonde gal and ran into something while driving...............

Nobody wants to accept responsibility for their own actions any more. And the sad part is when someone does (perhaps the warden did) the "rules" say they can;t and someone else gets the whack.

Common sense is rapidly becoming extinct.

johnr's picture
johnr
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 2/18/04

gst Said:
allen, a couple simple non "personal" questions.

1. have you ever had to "drive around" a rock pile on a section line?

2. If you happened to be watching a pretty blonde gal riding her horse in the pasture beside where you are driving and you forget the "around" part when driving and run up on the rock pile, who;s fault is it you are sitting up on a rock pile with your pickup?
 
Think the wife will blame the pretty girl or the farmer who "obstructed" the section line with his rocks?

I would guess if I or you were watching a big buck or a pretty blonde gal and ran into something while driving...............

Nobody wants to accept responsibility for their own actions any more. And the sad part is when someone does (perhaps the warden did) the "rules" say they can;t and someone else gets the whack.

Common sense is rapidly becoming extinct.

GST I agree, the guy who placed the rock on the section line to prevent travel of "his" section line is at fault and needs to accept that.

You can not block a public roadway just because you feel as though it is yours.

If the rock was not in the path of the section line, well then the game warden is responsible.

Kinda depends, and as it sounds the rock was placed in the middle of the road.

Neat

Woodpecker's picture
Woodpecker
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 12/16/01

johnr Said:

gst Said:
allen, a couple simple non "personal" questions.

1. have you ever had to "drive around" a rock pile on a section line?

2. If you happened to be watching a pretty blonde gal riding her horse in the pasture beside where you are driving and you forget the "around" part when driving and run up on the rock pile, who;s fault is it you are sitting up on a rock pile with your pickup?
 
Think the wife will blame the pretty girl or the farmer who "obstructed" the section line with his rocks?

I would guess if I or you were watching a big buck or a pretty blonde gal and ran into something while driving...............

Nobody wants to accept responsibility for their own actions any more. And the sad part is when someone does (perhaps the warden did) the "rules" say they can;t and someone else gets the whack.

Common sense is rapidly becoming extinct.

GST I agree, the guy who placed the rock on the section line to prevent travel of "his" section line is at fault and needs to accept that.

You can not block a public roadway just because you feel as though it is yours.

If the rock was not in the path of the section line, well then the game warden is responsible.

Kinda depends, and as it sounds the rock was placed in the middle of the road.

Blocked=can't get around it

I guess if I need a new paint job on my pickup I can find a hayed section line, look to the left, give er the onion, and plow right into a large round bale.  After all, he put that bale there on purpose.

labhunter66's picture
labhunter66
Offline
Joined: 3/7/07

 

Springers Said:
Actually I am not sure I agree with you. You may be right. First of all, i dont think distracted driving applies to situations where u happen to take your eyes off the road for a few seconds and i have to wonder if it applies in an off road situation like a section line. But, I could equate it to this... Drunk driver is on road and swerving. Five drivers happen to avoid him and call in his swerving. Driver #6 comes upon him and happens to be fiddling with the radio and doesn't see him swerving and they meet head on. He was distracted. But should he be charged? The rock in the road is similar to the driver in my lane is it not? That's a bit of a stretch. But not in the context of someone's criminal actions negating or not negating someone else's. I am on my phone again. You mind posting the distracted driving statute?

There is no distracted driver statute in North Dakota.  Only a ban on texting while driving.

What the landowner did was illegal.  Nobody can really argue that as a judge or jury already came to that finding.  As far as I can tell what the warden did may have been negligent but not illegal.  Illegal will trump not illegal every time.

For those that want to condemn the warden consider the possibility that he'd driven that section line on other occasions without incident.  Now there is a rock where there wasn't a rock before.  NOBODY is watching the road 100% of the time while they are driving. People are constantly scanning the area around the road and in the distance.  Law enforcement has a tougher time while driving because they are forced to work and make observations from a motor vehicle while driving.  That's just the nature of the job.  Now he's traveling a trail he's traveled other times without incident and is observing hunters in the field, which is part of his job, so his attention would certainly be distracted to some degree.  Shouldn't be a big deal because he's traveled the trail before without incident but this time there's a rock that hasn't been there in the past, a rock that by all accounts was placed there illegally, and all of a sudden bam he hits it.  Not a far fetched scenario. What did he do that was illegal?  

Springers's picture
Springers
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 1/12/07

Gst, it's about more than just a "hall monitor" comment and you know it. If you honestly believe it is, that just cements the fact that I believe you only see things how they exist betwixt your ears.

gst's picture
gst
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 3/12/09

johnr Said:

Db Said:
Negative comments:

First: ask yourself why they are made or the reason they are made by that person.

Second: what is the responds and what road do you want to go down.

Third: do you become detached or continue on.

Fourth: turn negative into positive,  the cup is indeed half full and not half empty.

I have found saying "you may be right" to end the discussion will usually either piss the person off more or make him/her feel good so we can go on to some other subject.
If it is a women they will be more pissed but a guy will usually then go on.

If it was me I would of said I had no ideal how that rock got there but either my grandfather working with horses put it there or God with the help of the ice must of drop it there.  Common sense in answering a question by a guy with a badge on. 
As a kid I did clean up a lot of section lines with the help of a WD-9 and a stone boat.  Now the section line is only a memory in a number of fields.
db

You block a public road to prevent someone from using it, you are a dick. Someone hits your road block now your a dick and responsible. If you put a rock near a road inadvertently shit happens, you are not a dick.

We all own the section lines, the closer you live to one does not constitute ownership of said section line

The point seemingly being overlooked here is apparently no one (perhaps other than his neighbor trying to drive down a section line with a large piece of equipment who maybe spent as much time driving in his smooth field as on the rough section line trail, ) was being prevented from using it. They just had to drive around a 3 foot by 4 foot rock.
 
I'm going to cut hay after dinner, I will drive my swather down my neighbors smooth  harvested field instead of bouncing down the rough prairie trail on the section line. But then my neighbor and I get along and he does the same thing in my fields without a hissy fit being thrown.

It sure seems like most people other than this one warden had no problem driving down this section line.

Db's picture
Db
Offline
AMATEUR
Joined: 9/11/09

Now if the lady had no clothes on that would change my whole ideal of what would be important to talk about.
Screw the conversation about the rock pile.
 
Yes the farmer should not of put the rock to obstruct travel down a section line. 
Maybe he could of got the township or county to get it abandon. 
But at times one needs to ask why are they traveling down the section line especially if it leads to nowhere. 
No he does not own the section line or the deer that may live on the section line or by the section line.  But he does own the land next to the section line and I do respect him for that. He does house MY deer on his land and they do eat on his land. 
And God bless the cow/calf man for the steaks he gives me.
Yes it is open to public travel but at the same time I have found that if I ask I end up with more land to hunt on than what I can hunt.
And if the farmer or rancher does not want me on HIS section line so be it.  I do respect the owner of the land and his wishes even though he can not stop me from going there. 
The word fair is only used by little kids during recess and is no longer a word when you become an adult.
And if I hit a rock then it becomes my problem as it happen to me in my younger and stupid days and I was just happy to get out of there without the owner knowing I was there.
And finally game and fish, get a life and learn how to work with the public for the good of the end.  My dollars I give you and others can be used to repair your vehicle. 
That would be ok by me and I do give you permission to do that.  db

Db

Db's picture
Db
Offline
AMATEUR
Joined: 9/11/09

Yes life can be a lot easier if we would live up to what we need to live up to instead of running to someone else to get what one may feel just in getting.
In this case the end result would be worth it and maybe we would still end up being friends working together for the good of all.  db

Db

odocoileus's picture
odocoileus
Offline
Joined: 12/30/06

 20 pages...almost there!!

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed

Go afield with a good attitude, with respect for the wildlife you hunt and for the forest and fields in which you walk.  Immerse yourself in the outdoor experience. It will cleanse your soul and make you a better person. -Fred Bear-
 

Hardwaterman's picture
Hardwaterman
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 11/6/02

labhunter66 Said:
 

Springers Said:
Actually I am not sure I agree with you. You may be right. First of all, i dont think distracted driving applies to situations where u happen to take your eyes off the road for a few seconds and i have to wonder if it applies in an off road situation like a section line. But, I could equate it to this... Drunk driver is on road and swerving. Five drivers happen to avoid him and call in his swerving. Driver #6 comes upon him and happens to be fiddling with the radio and doesn't see him swerving and they meet head on. He was distracted. But should he be charged? The rock in the road is similar to the driver in my lane is it not? That's a bit of a stretch. But not in the context of someone's criminal actions negating or not negating someone else's. I am on my phone again. You mind posting the distracted driving statute?

There is no distracted driver statute in North Dakota.  Only a ban on texting while driving.

What the landowner did was illegal.  Nobody can really argue that as a judge or jury already came to that finding.  As far as I can tell what the warden did may have been negligent but not illegal.  Illegal will trump not illegal every time.

For those that want to condemn the warden consider the possibility that he'd driven that section line on other occasions without incident.  Now there is a rock where there wasn't a rock before.  NOBODY is watching the road 100% of the time while they are driving. People are constantly scanning the area around the road and in the distance.  Law enforcement has a tougher time while driving because they are forced to work and make observations from a motor vehicle while driving.  That's just the nature of the job.  Now he's traveling a trail he's traveled other times without incident and is observing hunters in the field, which is part of his job, so his attention would certainly be distracted to some degree.  Shouldn't be a big deal because he's traveled the trail before without incident but this time there's a rock that hasn't been there in the past, a rock that by all accounts was placed there illegally, and all of a sudden bam he hits it.  Not a far fetched scenario. What did he do that was illegal?  

So you can read a newspaper while driving and not get a ticket? You can put makeup o and not get a ticket? You can sleep for that matter and not get a ticket? Think again!!!!

In my lifetime I have seen fence row to fence row farming and the return of CRP and game to the landscape.Now we face again the prosepect of fence row to fence row again! Sportsman are our own worst enemy in that we fail to look forward and focus to much on the now!

Springers's picture
Springers
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 1/12/07

What's the applicable law in GWs case hwm? Careless or reckless driving? Can someone post the actual statute?

Springers's picture
Springers
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 1/12/07

If the landowner has $ to spend on an appeal, why didbt he ask for a jury trial? Chances of acquittal or dismissal are usually far greater.

Allen's picture
Allen
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 1/9/02

gst Said:
allen, a couple simple non "personal" questions.

1. have you ever had to "drive around" a rock pile on a section line?
Yes, but they weren't placed there as an obstruction.  The trail going "around them" has been there for decades, the rock piles were placed on the part of the terrain that already forced a diversion in the trail.  I don't know many who place rock piles on something they may wish to hay.

2. If you happened to be watching a pretty blonde gal riding her horse in the pasture beside where you are driving and you forget the "around" part when driving and run up on the rock pile, who;s fault is it you are sitting up on a rock pile with your pickup?
My fault, then again if I am able to keep my vehicle on the decades old trails and I hit a rock, it's probably the fault of someone who recently placed a rock there intentionally.

 
Think the wife will blame the pretty girl or the farmer who "obstructed" the section line with his rocks?

I would guess if I or you were watching a big buck or a pretty blonde gal and ran into something while driving...............

Nobody wants to accept responsibility for their own actions any more. And the sad part is when someone does (perhaps the warden did) the "rules" say they can;t and someone else gets the whack.

Odd part here is that the farmer claims to have wanted to take responsibility for his actions early on, and then the legal system got involved and decided to make an example out of him. I think most of us, if we were the GW would have also made statements about it being our own fault to some extent because we all know there were things we could have done differently.

Common sense is rapidly becoming extinct.

“Sometimes I wonder whether the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on or by imbeciles who really mean it.” ~ Mark Twain

tikkalover's picture
tikkalover
Offline
Joined: 11/15/09

I think you guys need to put more booze in your morning coffee !!

Allen's picture
Allen
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 1/9/02

Hardwaterman Said:

So you can read a newspaper while driving and not get a ticket? You can put makeup o and not get a ticket? You can sleep for that matter and not get a ticket? Think again!!!!

I believe the ticket you would get for such actions would range from "Care Required" to "Careless Driving" to "Reckless Driving".  All can be used to ticket someone for getting into trouble with the officer and legal system weighing in on how egregious of a violation it turned out to be.

I had a couple of the Care Required and Careless Driving tickets in my youth.  Basically, our local Sheriff's office that that anytime you got into an accident you qualified for the $20 Care Required ticket because if you had been paying MORE attention, driving slower, or driving defensively you wouldn't have dented your fenders.

“Sometimes I wonder whether the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on or by imbeciles who really mean it.” ~ Mark Twain

TommyBoy's picture
TommyBoy
Offline
Joined: 8/6/13

 Call me obtuse, but haven't we discussed this enough?  
(Insert beating a dead horse joke)

 

Allen's picture
Allen
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 1/9/02

tshort Said:
Blocked=can't get around it

I guess if I need a new paint job on my pickup I can find a hayed section line, look to the left, give er the onion, and plow right into a large round bale.  After all, he put that bale there on purpose.

So you are saying that if I set up a pattern like the below on our section lines that I should be good to go?

“Sometimes I wonder whether the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on or by imbeciles who really mean it.” ~ Mark Twain

Dick McFiddleton's picture
Dick McFiddleton
Offline
Joined: 4/9/14

 That would stop those pesky hunters from driving section lines during my sits.  

johnr's picture
johnr
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 2/18/04

Neat

odocoileus's picture
odocoileus
Offline
Joined: 12/30/06

Lindy Fishing

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed

Go afield with a good attitude, with respect for the wildlife you hunt and for the forest and fields in which you walk.  Immerse yourself in the outdoor experience. It will cleanse your soul and make you a better person. -Fred Bear-
 

Woodpecker's picture
Woodpecker
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 12/16/01

 

Allen Said:

tshort Said:
Blocked=can't get around it

I guess if I need a new paint job on my pickup I can find a hayed section line, look to the left, give er the onion, and plow right into a large round bale.  After all, he put that bale there on purpose.

So you are saying that if I set up a pattern like the below on our section lines that I should be good to go?

I used to think it's reasonable to expect people traveling a no maintenance road to pay attention to rocks, washouts, bales, and land mines. Not sure after this case.

hornhntr's picture
hornhntr
Offline
Joined: 11/10/08

Allen Said:
I am kind of at a loss for all those who want to string the GW up for "distracted driving".  His job is to watch out for illegal activities, I don't know why these hunters were in his sights, and don't really care.  However, I suspect GW's are trained to observe hunters as they approach them to be on the lookout for stupid things, like the ditching of lead shot in steel only areas, dropping of that extra bird into the tall grass, etc, etc.

As far as the degree to which some seem to think the GW is guilty of distracted driving, I hope like hell no big buck ever comes into view while you're behind the wheel out in the country.  Or some young blonde gal in town for that matter.

As some pointed out, others had to "drive around" the rock.  It wasn't that they had to stay on the 2-track trail to avoid hitting the rock, nope...they drove around it.  There is an expectation of a road, regardless of if it is 2-track or gravel, that the roadway is somewhat obstruction free.  Doesn't mean you can put your vehicle on auto-pilot, but at some level there is an expectation of there not having been an intentionally placed obstruction.  Especially if it is hidden in grass of sufficient height to make it difficult to see by even the most casual of observers.

Like many on here, I have mixed feelings about how this was handled as I just don't have all the details, nor the personal knowledge of the exact setting of the rock to the normal route of travel. However, I sure as heck can't find fault given with the GW's driving skills given what I understand about the situation.

Neither do I think ill of Mr. Bear at this point.

I agree with this. Isn't the observation of hunters part of the job responsibility? I am sure GW's often have to make observations while driving.

If I were the GW that hit that rock, I would probably feel pretty sheepish given the situation. If I found out that someone had purposefully put the rock there to impede traffic, I would be downright pissed.

If the farmer had placed the rock there to clear the field and it accidentally ended on the trail, I would understand and take the responsibility. But to put it there on purpose to stop or prohibit traffic, that would be a different story.

It is like running over debris on the road left from an accident versus running over debris that someone purposefully put there. I think it changes the situation.

 

Storm Rider's picture
Storm Rider
Offline
Joined: 11/15/10

Allen Said:
So you are saying that if I set up a pattern like the below on our section lines that I should be good to go?

Gen. Eisenhower didn't have a problem with your obstructions.


labhunter66's picture
labhunter66
Offline
Joined: 3/7/07

 

Hardwaterman Said:

labhunter66 Said:
 

Springers Said:
Actually I am not sure I agree with you. You may be right. First of all, i dont think distracted driving applies to situations where u happen to take your eyes off the road for a few seconds and i have to wonder if it applies in an off road situation like a section line. But, I could equate it to this... Drunk driver is on road and swerving. Five drivers happen to avoid him and call in his swerving. Driver #6 comes upon him and happens to be fiddling with the radio and doesn't see him swerving and they meet head on. He was distracted. But should he be charged? The rock in the road is similar to the driver in my lane is it not? That's a bit of a stretch. But not in the context of someone's criminal actions negating or not negating someone else's. I am on my phone again. You mind posting the distracted driving statute?

There is no distracted driver statute in North Dakota.  Only a ban on texting while driving.

What the landowner did was illegal.  Nobody can really argue that as a judge or jury already came to that finding.  As far as I can tell what the warden did may have been negligent but not illegal.  Illegal will trump not illegal every time.

For those that want to condemn the warden consider the possibility that he'd driven that section line on other occasions without incident.  Now there is a rock where there wasn't a rock before.  NOBODY is watching the road 100% of the time while they are driving. People are constantly scanning the area around the road and in the distance.  Law enforcement has a tougher time while driving because they are forced to work and make observations from a motor vehicle while driving.  That's just the nature of the job.  Now he's traveling a trail he's traveled other times without incident and is observing hunters in the field, which is part of his job, so his attention would certainly be distracted to some degree.  Shouldn't be a big deal because he's traveled the trail before without incident but this time there's a rock that hasn't been there in the past, a rock that by all accounts was placed there illegally, and all of a sudden bam he hits it.  Not a far fetched scenario. What did he do that was illegal?  

So you can read a newspaper while driving and not get a ticket? You can put makeup o and not get a ticket? You can sleep for that matter and not get a ticket? Think again!!!!

What are they going to charge you with?

Plainsman's picture
Plainsman
Offline
AMATEUR
Joined: 6/19/03

GST wrote:

Nobody wants to accept responsibility for their own actions any more. And the sad part is when someone does (perhaps the warden did) the "rules" say they can;t and someone else gets the whack.

Hmmm do you mean like wetland drainage flooding neighbors and city folk?  Do you mean like that and they deny it and the taxpayer picks up the billion dollar tabs?  It's good that after years and years debating you that you at last get it. 

Jake G's picture
Jake G
Offline
Joined: 7/17/11

     One morning in mid March, Farmer Brown is driving to town in his brand new Ford King Ranch to have coffee with his other farming buddies. He just picked up his truck from the ford dealer a few days earlier as a result of a bumper crop last fall and he needed a tax wright off.
 
     Meanwhile, city slicker Joe's wife, a real nag, has been hounding on him to get this big decorative rock out of their front yard that she just had to have a few years back. So Joe calls a few of his buddies to come over and help him load this rock into his pickup box. Joe get's out of town a ways and decided to drop the rock right on the side of the blacktop road that heads right to Farmer Brown's house. It's not right on the heavily worn tracks on the blacktop, but right on the edge of the road where the white stripe is, maybe just a little inside of it.  Joe heads back to town to finish some more odd jobs.

      Farmer brown gets his fill of coffee and decides to head back to the ranch. On the way home he looks out on his pasture of bred heifers and notices betsy is acting a little strange. He takes his focus off the road just long enough and BAM!!,   smokes the rock that city slicker Joe negligently placed on the route of travel. This is a very well traveled road and about 25 cars had gone by and were able to avoid the object on the road. 

     You can bet that Farmer brown would be looking for the responsible party that placed the object on the road that was never there before. There is not a whole lot of difference in this story. The rock was negligently placed there. Do you think Farmer brown is a retard for running into the rock??

Are the good times really over for good?

I'm gonna guarantee that buck a ride in the puckup truck!

bacon's picture
bacon
Offline
Joined: 1/23/09

You don't happen to be one of those guys that can't get on land to hunt do you? 

Jake G Said:
     One morning in mid March, Farmer Brown is driving to town in his brand new Ford King Ranch to have coffee with his other farming buddies. He just picked up his truck from the ford dealer a few days earlier as a result of a bumper crop last fall and he needed a tax wright off.
 
     Meanwhile, city slicker Joe's wife, a real nag, has been hounding on him to get this big decorative rock out of their front yard that she just had to have a few years back. So Joe calls a few of his buddies to come over and help him load this rock into his pickup box. Joe get's out of town a ways and decided to drop the rock right on the side of the blacktop road that heads right to Farmer Brown's house. It's not right on the heavily worn tracks on the blacktop, but right on the edge of the road where the white stripe is, maybe just a little inside of it.  Joe heads back to town to finish some more odd jobs.

      Farmer brown gets his fill of coffee and decides to head back to the ranch. On the way home he looks out on his pasture of bred heifers and notices betsy is acting a little strange. He takes his focus off the road just long enough and BAM!!,   smokes the rock that city slicker Joe negligently placed on the route of travel. This is a very well traveled road and about 25 cars had gone by and were able to avoid the object on the road. 

     You can bet that Farmer brown would be looking for the responsible party that placed the object on the road that was never there before. There is not a whole lot of difference in this story. The rock was negligently placed there. Do you think Farmer brown is a retard for running into the rock??

Plainsman's picture
Plainsman
Offline
AMATEUR
Joined: 6/19/03

What a statement.  Boggles the mind.  So telling a story that puts the shoe on the other foot is going to make farmers deny access.  Any farmer who does that I don't want to hunt his land.  I also don't want to vote for things that support an a$$ like that.  Lucky for us hunters that this doesn't depict the average farmer.  It only depicts maybe 5% of those who think the world owes them.  Maybe it's the price of a crown and throne that bothers that 5%.   

bacon Said:
You don't happen to be one of those guys that can't get on land to hunt do you? 

Jake G Said:
     One morning in mid March, Farmer Brown is driving to town in his brand new Ford King Ranch to have coffee with his other farming buddies. He just picked up his truck from the ford dealer a few days earlier as a result of a bumper crop last fall and he needed a tax wright off.
 
     Meanwhile, city slicker Joe's wife, a real nag, has been hounding on him to get this big decorative rock out of their front yard that she just had to have a few years back. So Joe calls a few of his buddies to come over and help him load this rock into his pickup box. Joe get's out of town a ways and decided to drop the rock right on the side of the blacktop road that heads right to Farmer Brown's house. It's not right on the heavily worn tracks on the blacktop, but right on the edge of the road where the white stripe is, maybe just a little inside of it.  Joe heads back to town to finish some more odd jobs.

      Farmer brown gets his fill of coffee and decides to head back to the ranch. On the way home he looks out on his pasture of bred heifers and notices betsy is acting a little strange. He takes his focus off the road just long enough and BAM!!,   smokes the rock that city slicker Joe negligently placed on the route of travel. This is a very well traveled road and about 25 cars had gone by and were able to avoid the object on the road. 

     You can bet that Farmer brown would be looking for the responsible party that placed the object on the road that was never there before. There is not a whole lot of difference in this story. The rock was negligently placed there. Do you think Farmer brown is a retard for running into the rock??

Kentucky Windage's picture
Kentucky Windage
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 5/6/11

Sounds like they should split the bill. Carelessness in placing the rock on the section line and carelessness driving down the section line. 

 

Crackshot.'s picture
Crackshot.
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 7/14/09

   Best idea I've heard so far but the days of people working things out for the best of both parties seem like a thing of the past.  It's getting to be an "all or nothing" world.   

Kentucky Windage Said:
Sounds like they should split the bill. Carelessness in placing the rock on the section line and carelessness driving down the section line. 

 

 

 

Life is good
 

 

 

 

gst's picture
gst
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 3/12/09

We have two bingos, trouble is they require a bit of common sense. 

tshort Short said:
I used to think it's reasonable to expect people traveling a no maintenance road to pay attention to rocks, washouts, bales, and land mines. Not sure after this case.

Kentucky Windage Said:
Sounds like they should split the bill. Carelessness in placing the rock on the section line and carelessness driving down the section line. 

gst's picture
gst
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 3/12/09

Plainsman Said:
GST wrote:

Nobody wants to accept responsibility for their own actions any more. And the sad part is when someone does (perhaps the warden did) the "rules" say they can;t and someone else gets the whack.

Hmmm do you mean like wetland drainage flooding neighbors and city folk?  Do you mean like that and they deny it and the taxpayer picks up the billion dollar tabs?  It's good that after years and years debating you that you at last get it. 

plainsman if a lawyer such as espringers could show that Farmer Browns drainage flooded the city of Fargo rather than the record spring rains or winter snows in the same manner flooding took place before Farmer Brown ever set foot on the land, I gurantee he would do so. Think of the billable hours he could rack up.

Hell Bruce maybe he could name God as a co defendant.

You still can;t get over that Devils Lake flooded to the point of spilling over into the Tolna Coulee several times before tiling  and draingage in farming ever existed can you.

Jake G's picture
Jake G
Offline
Joined: 7/17/11

bacon Said:
You don't happen to be one of those guys that can't get on land to hunt do you? 

Jake G Said:
     One morning in mid March, Farmer Brown is driving to town in his brand new Ford King Ranch to have coffee with his other farming buddies. He just picked up his truck from the ford dealer a few days earlier as a result of a bumper crop last fall and he needed a tax wright off.
 
     Meanwhile, city slicker Joe's wife, a real nag, has been hounding on him to get this big decorative rock out of their front yard that she just had to have a few years back. So Joe calls a few of his buddies to come over and help him load this rock into his pickup box. Joe get's out of town a ways and decided to drop the rock right on the side of the blacktop road that heads right to Farmer Brown's house. It's not right on the heavily worn tracks on the blacktop, but right on the edge of the road where the white stripe is, maybe just a little inside of it.  Joe heads back to town to finish some more odd jobs.

      Farmer brown gets his fill of coffee and decides to head back to the ranch. On the way home he looks out on his pasture of bred heifers and notices betsy is acting a little strange. He takes his focus off the road just long enough and BAM!!,   smokes the rock that city slicker Joe negligently placed on the route of travel. This is a very well traveled road and about 25 cars had gone by and were able to avoid the object on the road. 

     You can bet that Farmer brown would be looking for the responsible party that placed the object on the road that was never there before. There is not a whole lot of difference in this story. The rock was negligently placed there. Do you think Farmer brown is a retard for running into the rock?

Haha, of coarse I have land to hunt, that's why I have deer in my pictures and not broncos.  I didn't diss any farmers. I come from many generations of them..

Are the good times really over for good?

I'm gonna guarantee that buck a ride in the puckup truck!

gst's picture
gst
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 3/12/09

That ought to be good for another 3 pages.

gst's picture
gst
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 3/12/09

A busy hiway to an unmaintained section line???

So Jake, you don;t think the warden has ANY accountability here?

Do you really think the $13,000 was worth jeapordizing efforts to improve landowner relationships with the G&F that are often times already strained?

Explain how this one rock is any different than a few hundred in a pile within the 66 feet allowance?

The one person on this site that has firsthand knowledge of driving around this rock seems to think both parties have a bit of responsibility here.

gst's picture
gst
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 3/12/09

Springers Said:
Gst, it's about more than just a "hall monitor" comment and you know it. If you honestly believe it is, that just cements the fact that I believe you only see things how they exist betwixt your ears.

Christ almighty espringers change your panties and get over it.

Try not to lie about what people say while your changing.

SHORTHAIRSRUS's picture
SHORTHAIRSRUS
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 11/24/04

Jake G Said:
     One morning in mid October, Farmer Brown is driving to town in his brand new Ford King Ranch to have coffee with his other farming buddies. He just picked up his truck from the ford dealer a few days earlier as a result of a bumper crop last fall and he needed a tax wright off.
 
  and ole Farmer brown sees an outlaw shorthair working a field that he had freshly posted for rooty season.  Now we all know how fast shorthairs are --- the only way Brown could get to em is to run down his section line.   That section line was loaded full of obstacles --- old Brown put his king in 4 wheel and hit it as hard as he could.  

He never caught that old shorthair. But he left such a trench --that trench filled with rain water and walleye swam in and spawned and the rest is history --  it became what is known as the famed Browns Bay.  

http://www.fishingbuddy.com/browns_bay

and once you have caught those big walleys make sure you take them to your favorite cleaning station   http://www.fishingbuddy.com/cleaning_station/?commentId=366502

Stay thirsty my friends

Allen's picture
Allen
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 1/9/02

gst Said:

Explain how this one rock is any different than a few hundred in a pile within the 66 feet allowance?

Someone can correct me if I am wrong, but the preponderance of what I have read is starting to suggest that the big difference here is the rock was placed in such a manner as to divert traffic.  Rockpiles, on the other hand, are generally placed to be out of the way as much as possible.

Can I really be the only one on here who has started a rockpile?

Granted, while none of which were on a section line, most were located fairly close to a trail we used to access our croplands and pasture.  Pretty sure my stepfather would have made me move them if I dropped a load in the middle of a trail.

“Sometimes I wonder whether the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on or by imbeciles who really mean it.” ~ Mark Twain

Jake G's picture
Jake G
Offline
Joined: 7/17/11

gst Said:
A busy hiway to an unmaintained section line???

So Jake, you don;t think the warden has ANY accountability here?

Do you really think the $13,000 was worth jeapordizing efforts to improve landowner relationships with the G&F that are often times already strained?

Explain how this one rock is any different than a few hundred in a pile within the 66 feet allowance?

The one person on this site that has firsthand knowledge of driving around this rock seems to think both parties have a bit of responsibility here.

Well you are not supposed to place rocks on highways and you are not supposed to place rocks on section lines. Guess I could of changed the story to Farmer Brown's section line.

I do think that the warden probably should have seen the rock. But if it weren't illegally placed there, we wouldn't be talking about this now. When one parties actions were illegal and the other's were not, the law wins every time.

I guess 1 rock is no different. If you ran into a huge rock pile placed ON a section line, you would be getting a new truck! ( By what the law states anyways).

I believe, if the rock was implanted in the ground still, and had naturally been there since  the winds, rains, glaciers, and elements left is sit where it was there would be no case here. But the rock was placed there, and it sounds like there is strong testimony the farmer set it there with ill intent to his neighbor.

I'd love to give the farmer the benefit of the doubt here but I've seen enough jackwad crap going on in my country. I've seen fence post pounded in the middle of section lines even seen a sickle mower blade placed in the tall grass on an access to a trail.

I'm sure if Mr. Bear was not trying to impede any traffic he could have found several "better" locations for this damn rock..

good day

Are the good times really over for good?

I'm gonna guarantee that buck a ride in the puckup truck!

wstnodak's picture
wstnodak
Offline
Joined: 11/3/02

 

Jake G Said:

gst Said:
A busy hiway to an unmaintained section line???

So Jake, you don;t think the warden has ANY accountability here?

Do you really think the $13,000 was worth jeapordizing efforts to improve landowner relationships with the G&F that are often times already strained?

Explain how this one rock is any different than a few hundred in a pile within the 66 feet allowance?

The one person on this site that has firsthand knowledge of driving around this rock seems to think both parties have a bit of responsibility here.

Well you are not supposed to place rocks on highways and you are not supposed to place rocks on section lines. Guess I could of changed the story to Farmer Brown's section line.

I do think that the warden probably should have seen the rock. But if it weren't illegally placed there, we wouldn't be talking about this now. When one parties actions were illegal and the other's were not, the law wins every time.

I guess 1 rock is no different. If you ran into a huge rock pile placed ON a section line, you would be getting a new truck! ( By what the law states anyways).

I believe, if the rock was implanted in the ground still, and had naturally been there since  the winds, rains, glaciers, and elements left is sit where it was there would be no case here. But the rock was placed there, and it sounds like there is strong testimony the farmer set it there with ill intent to his neighbor.

I'd love to give the farmer the benefit of the doubt here but I've seen enough jackwad crap going on in my country. I've seen fence post pounded in the middle of section lines even seen a sickle mower blade placed in the tall grass on an access to a trail.

I'm sure if Mr. Bear was not trying to impede any traffic he could have found several "better" locations for this damn rock..

good day

That is way to logical for gabe to understand jake.  Drink a 12 pack, try again and then you might be at his level.

If god didn't want us to eat animals....he wouldn't have made them out of food.

Hardwaterman's picture
Hardwaterman
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 11/6/02

Allen the rock was next to a bush,or small tree and when I said I drove around it, the point I was making was that with minimal attention I knew the rock was there, and made the effort to make sure I avoided running into it same as the tree and the tractor with tillage equipment that was sitting on the two wheel track.

I grew up in an area with lots of section lines that where used for dumping of rocks from fields. Most of the rocks where dumped when picking them by hand meant putting them on a steel plate refered to as a stone boat. They where off loaded by hand as well. So the entire section line along some fields was a rock obstacle.

People unfamiliar with this activity many times would drive off the trail area or be distracted and end up with dented or holed oil pans. The section line between us and the neighbor had larger rocks than the one involved in this event. When dad had some rock piles buried he had the dozer operator push them off the section line into the pasture area so we could hay it easier. You snaked your way through that half mile until then. Nobody ever hit one of them that I am aware.

So as others have pointed out, the bill for this really should have been split. The GW does not get a pass in my book for not paying attention to where he was going. His actions call into question the safety of having them on the road that is more traveled putting others in danger if this is the way they are observing.

I will give you a chance to address this, in June I went on a motorcycle run out of Jamestown to honor the fallen soldiers from ND. It was not a pleasant day, overcast to start and then rain. We where on a state highway north of Jamestown when the hard rain hit.  . Road is well used but not broken up but has indent wheel tracks. With the hard rain those wheel tracks filled with water. Most of us drove our bikes on the high spot of the road. However the wheel tracks where deep enough that you would hydroplane county road grader was out that Sat for some reason working county and township roads. Well he pulled onto the highway and mud and gravel fell off the grader on those high spots. One of the riders laid his bike down as a result of trying to avoid the mud and gravel and hit the water trapped in the wheel tracks now based on this who should get the bill for fixing his bike?

we have beet harvest every year in the valley.Some years fields are nasty and a lot of mud gets on the road way. Farmers make a very good effort to keep the road ways as clear of the mud they can. Some even have purchased older road graders to do the job or use a angle blade behind tractors. People driving these roads are aware of the potential obstacles that they may face and use common sense and pay attention to avoid hitting the big mud chunks that can come off a rig coming out of a field. Sure seems a GW would have the common sense to know that driving down a no maintence section line requires at bit of attention to where you are going since many of these section lines do not have straight two wheel tracks running from end to end.

So all I want to know is how a driver of a state owned vehicle can crash into a non moving object that was easily avoided and have no responsibility????????
 

In my lifetime I have seen fence row to fence row farming and the return of CRP and game to the landscape.Now we face again the prosepect of fence row to fence row again! Sportsman are our own worst enemy in that we fail to look forward and focus to much on the now!

feather_duster's picture
feather_duster
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 9/10/06

 Im assuming because the rock wasn't suppose to be there???? So many questions that are left unanswered.   Who knows he may have been tindering.....

Hardwaterman Said:

So all I want to know is how a driver of a state owned vehicle can crash into a non moving object that was easily avoided and have no responsibility????
 

Dick McFiddleton's picture
Dick McFiddleton
Offline
Joined: 4/9/14

gst's picture
gst
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 3/12/09

Allen Said:

gst Said:

Explain how this one rock is any different than a few hundred in a pile within the 66 feet allowance?

Someone can correct me if I am wrong, but the preponderance of what I have read is starting to suggest that the big difference here is the rock was placed in such a manner as to divert traffic.  Rockpiles, on the other hand, are generally placed to be out of the way as much as possible.

Can I really be the only one on here who has started a rockpile?

Granted, while none of which were on a section line, most were located fairly close to a trail we used to access our croplands and pasture.  Pretty sure my stepfather would have made me move them if I dropped a load in the middle of a trail.

allen, started many rock piles over the years, never one on a prairie trail.  But I can take you to 10 rock piles I can think of off the top of my head that you have to "drive around" on the section line  prairie trail they are on. Two different farmers on either side of the section line at one time piled their rocks in the middle because the section lines were rarely traveled and we did not have internet sites to whine and bitch about having to drive around a rock on a prairie trail.

I would guess the talley of similar rock piles across the state is significant.

Now granted I would guess they have not been placed there "intentionally to obstruct"  but the fact remains they are just as much "obstructing" as this "very large rock" likely was.

So if the warden is eyeballing someone to see if they are piling their ducks while he is driving down the trail and runs into one of those rock piles, who is at fault?

ah hell maybe farmers should just pile their rocks in a wetlands on their own property instead of the section lines so NOBODY drives over them...................wait a minute, there is laws against that too.

gst's picture
gst
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 3/12/09

Jake G Said:

gst Said:
A busy hiway to an unmaintained section line???

So Jake, you don;t think the warden has ANY accountability here?

Do you really think the $13,000 was worth jeapordizing efforts to improve landowner relationships with the G&F that are often times already strained?

Explain how this one rock is any different than a few hundred in a pile within the 66 feet allowance?

The one person on this site that has firsthand knowledge of driving around this rock seems to think both parties have a bit of responsibility here.

Well you are not supposed to place rocks on highways and you are not supposed to place rocks on section lines. Guess I could of changed the story to Farmer Brown's section line.

I do think that the warden probably should have seen the rock. But if it weren't illegally placed there, we wouldn't be talking about this now. When one parties actions were illegal and the other's were not, the law wins every time.

I guess 1 rock is no different. If you ran into a huge rock pile placed ON a section line, you would be getting a new truck! ( By what the law states anyways).

I believe, if the rock was implanted in the ground still, and had naturally been there since  the winds, rains, glaciers, and elements left is sit where it was there would be no case here. But the rock was placed there, and it sounds like there is strong testimony the farmer set it there with ill intent to his neighbor.

I'd love to give the farmer the benefit of the doubt here but I've seen enough jackwad crap going on in my country. I've seen fence post pounded in the middle of section lines even seen a sickle mower blade placed in the tall grass on an access to a trail.

I'm sure if Mr. Bear was not trying to impede any traffic he could have found several "better" locations for this damn rock..

good day

And if the warden had been watching where he was driving and not run over it we would likely not be talking about it either.

and I'm sure if the "intent" was to "impede travel"  it seems Mr Bear did a poor job of it as it appears the only impediment  numerous people had was to have to turn their steering wheel a bit much like when driving around large rock piles on section line ROW.

Jake G Said:
I believe it was placed on a ROW easement but not directly on the two track trail. That is why he is still in trouble. The judge went completely by the book.

Indeed lets cast common sense aside because "the book" says one thing. Whether it is one rock or a rock pile, it is an "obstruction" if you are going to go "by the book".

So should the states attorneys start traveling prairie roads and have their "investigator" determine who the last person to place a rock on a rock pile was and drag them into court?

Common sense seems to be near extinction.

svnmag's picture
svnmag
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 11/3/02
 Farmer violated Letter of the Law.  Court decided he also violated the Spirit/Intent.  This new age Nazism has me weary:   gd:  You guys love to type: The farmer should have kept his mouth SHUT as NO good deed/intention goes unpunished within the current soft fascism.  Eff the state vehicle.  

 Nuke the Whales

svnmag's picture
svnmag
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 11/3/02

 

 Nuke the Whales

bacon's picture
bacon
Offline
Joined: 1/23/09

Not a Bronco, hahahah. Since you had the haha in your reply..I can tell the disdain in your reply just like half the so called sportsman have disdain for landowners on here. Just how I see it. Keep posting pics of big deer though. It's impressive.  

Jake G Said:

bacon Said:
You don't happen to be one of those guys that can't get on land to hunt do you? 

Jake G Said:
     One morning in mid March, Farmer Brown is driving to town in his brand new Ford King Ranch to have coffee with his other farming buddies. He just picked up his truck from the ford dealer a few days earlier as a result of a bumper crop last fall and he needed a tax wright off.
 
     Meanwhile, city slicker Joe's wife, a real nag, has been hounding on him to get this big decorative rock out of their front yard that she just had to have a few years back. So Joe calls a few of his buddies to come over and help him load this rock into his pickup box. Joe get's out of town a ways and decided to drop the rock right on the side of the blacktop road that heads right to Farmer Brown's house. It's not right on the heavily worn tracks on the blacktop, but right on the edge of the road where the white stripe is, maybe just a little inside of it.  Joe heads back to town to finish some more odd jobs.

      Farmer brown gets his fill of coffee and decides to head back to the ranch. On the way home he looks out on his pasture of bred heifers and notices betsy is acting a little strange. He takes his focus off the road just long enough and BAM!!,   smokes the rock that city slicker Joe negligently placed on the route of travel. This is a very well traveled road and about 25 cars had gone by and were able to avoid the object on the road. 

     You can bet that Farmer brown would be looking for the responsible party that placed the object on the road that was never there before. There is not a whole lot of difference in this story. The rock was negligently placed there. Do you think Farmer brown is a retard for running into the rock?

Haha, of coarse I have land to hunt, that's why I have deer in my pictures and not broncos.  I didn't diss any farmers. I come from many generations of them..

Pages