Crazy Hunter Harassment Duck Hunting In North Dakota (Game Warden Involved!)

[Jiffy]

All I can say is ol' Jeffy is lucky it was some kid and not some well established "older" guy with a point to prove. I'd fight it just for the hell of it. I'm that German.

 

[johnr]

All I can say is ol' Jeffy is lucky it was some kid and not some well established "older" guy with a point to prove. I'd fight it just for the hell of it. I'm that German.

I am pretty sure I would have too, just because of how he acted. I am that American...

 

[Tymurrey]

Let’s be honest, Jeff acted like an asshole and the kid went somewhere he wasn’t allowed to on private land which equates to trespassing. If everything we have been told is true that is black and white. He blatantly went where he was told not to go by the landowner. I’ve been told not to hunt certain areas of peoples land many times. Sometimes it’s very specific instructions and sometimes pretty vague but I try to not push the limits.

 

[KDM]

The hunters are guilty of trespassing. They went where they didn't have permission to be as stated by the owner of the land. They were told to stay away from the property line and they were NOT supposed to hunt that part of the property and they ignored that. Loudmouth is guilty of hunter harassment. Obviously. Both parties were in the wrong here. Just another big stupidity that does absolutely no good for anybody.

 

[db-2]

Years ago, i get a phone call in January from a game warden.
Said i imagine you know why i am calling you. I said i had no idea.

He said i hunted on posted land. Told me the story and i stated i never hunted on that land.

Said he had me dead to right and the fine is $100.
I said i never hunted on that land. He said my vehicle tracks are on the summer fallow land. Told him i will meet him there to compare. He said he had just cultivated the land.
I said you are telling me he cultivated that land that was frozen.

He said plead guilty, or the fine will be $250 plus loss of hunting rights for two years. Plus, i will find out who was with you, and he will get the same.

Some lawyers known what they are doing and some not. Most do not and for sure not in this case. I put my own case together and walked a free man. No way was i going to have on my record something i did not do. db

 

[BrokenBackJack]

I would certainly do the same DB and did about 30 years ago.
Judge found me not guilty and I wasn't. The Judge knew me well and when I made my case before him I told him, you have known me most of my life, if I did something I would admit to doing it and if I didn't do something, there is no way in hell I will ever admit that I did it.
The warden said after court he didn't think I would fight it and just pay the fine. Well, he found out differently.

 

[NDbowman]

One can get in trouble for going "near" someone's land?
WTF

I am telling you all right now to not go near my land, there you have been told and will be prosecuted iffn any of you even do a drive by...

Is this your version of electronically posted? Do you use color codes like green, yellow, and red?

 

[Kentucky Windage]

Bout 25 years ago, I had a guy become "Erman" on me by Medora.
Shot a 120ish whitetail with my bow. Guy was super happy till he seen it was a whitetail.
He became just as uncunted as Jeff.

That’s because deer in ND belong to the people of ND.

 

[bucksnbears]

I guess!

Sure are happy to call me to come shoot coyotes though

 

[shorthairsrus]

who got the higher fine is what i want to know?? Jeffrey or the kid?

 

[7mmMag]

There is a variable to this story that I'm missing. Which landowner charged him with trespassing? Jeff can't charge him with trespassing. It would have to be the landowner that he had permission from.

 

[TFX 186]

7MMMag, exactly what I was wondering. It seems this part of the whole story has been left out of any mention??? It would have to be the landowner who gave them permission to hunt who pressed charges for hunting "Too Close" to Jeffies place. Was it mentioned that the landowner who gave permission was a relative of Jeffies? Again, I think something smells here.
Fish On!

 

[Tymurrey]

I would assume it was from the landowner that gave him permission to hunt but not in that area. Unless there was some other form of evidence that they went onto Jeff’s land. Did they collect corn stubble to camo their blind from Jeff’s field or drive in to talk to the other hunters? Lots of information we may never know.

 

[Davey Crockett]

There is a variable to this story that I'm missing. Which landowner charged him with trespassing? Jeff can't charge him with trespassing. It would have to be the landowner that he had permission from.

You'd think that LEO's can charge someone with trespassing on private land without the consent from anyone but that's just a guess.

I was online the day the video was released so I did a search on facebook and saw the following.

The landowner who granted permission and the hunter who had asked for permission , in a heated argument . The land owner seemed very pissed off and stated 2 or 3 times that he had been very clear about staying away from Jeff's land when he "granted" them permission. The word granted seemed out of place because we usually say I "gave" you permission. The landowner was clearly very pissed off about the whole thing and the hunter kept deleting landowners posts that he didn't want the public to see. Then a couple days later the Sweere kid said they hunted the same field again the next day. t

That's where It gets confusing. The way the fur was flying during the online confrontation I was surprised that they had resolved it that fast and thought they either made amends after they settled down or .... (This is me thinking out loud) Was there a money exchange under the table for a 2 day hunt and hunters had landowner over a barrel ? Or Sweere told a fib and said they hunted the same field when they didn't to add credibility to his grand slam video. Also whoever mentioned that you have to include advertisement to make money of youtube videos , I'm not sure how accurate that is , I read several articles that said otherwise .
hey hunted the same field the next day.

 

[Freedom]

If illegally hunting do hunter harassment laws still apply?

 

[Allen]

How much different would it have been if the land owner said " you can hunt my land but stay away from section 16 " and the hunter went on section 16 ? He was given permission to hunt with instructions where not to hunt. I assume the land owner had part in the trespass citation

Right, I was assuming he was ticketed for trespassing for being where he was at on Jeff's neighbor's land, not for being on Captain A-hole's corn. Or am I misremembering something?

 

[Kurtr]

If illegally hunting do hunter harassment laws still apply?

Isnt illegally hunting called poaching?

 

[Allen]

If illegally hunting do hunter harassment laws still apply?

No, you have to be on a "legal hunt". The Century Code specifically prohibits interfering with the "lawful taking of wildlife on public or private land...". This suggests that if you are poaching, you can indeed be harassed without consequences.

 

[Freedom]

If trespassing you're no longer legally hunting? People will shit if somehow Jeffy walks

 

[Davey Crockett]

Article from New Rockford newspaper.

January 23, 2023

Last October, a group of hunters descended upon a harvested bean field for an early-morning duck hunt in eastern Eddy County, but the hunt was ruined soon after due to an altercation with a nearby landowner.
The confrontation was caught on video and uploaded to YouTube by one of the hunters, and has since been watched more than 2.5 million times.
The video shows Jeffrey Erman approaching the hunters, who had set up along his property line. He then interrupts the ongoing hunt and begins berating them, arguing they were touching his property and that they’d ruined his hunting plans for that morning.
Erman now faces multiple charges stemming from the incident, including trading in special influence, a Class A misdemeanor, as well as disorderly conduct and interference with rights of hunters, both Class B misdemeanors.
Erman wasn’t the only individual to face charges, however, as Dustin Wolf of West Fargo, one of the hunters, was charged with criminal trespass, a Class B misdemeanor.
After originally pleading not guilty to the trespassing charge, Wolf has since reached a plea agreement and changed his plea to guilty.
According to the criminal complaint filed against him, Wolf had received permission to hunt on the harvested bean field from an authorized agent for the landowner, but was told not to hunt near the property line unless also given permission by Erman.
In the plea agreement, Wolf states, “I am pleading guilty because on or about October 21, 2022 … I was hunting on land on which I had permission to hunt. I had been provided notice to avoid hunting on a specific patch of land within that larger piece of land. Before placing my blind, I had not determined with certainty that I was not on that patch of land; It turned out that I was on that patch of land.”
Wolf has now been assessed $250 in various fees and fines, and according to his plea agreement, must also pay $200 to the North Dakota Game & Fish Report All Poachers Program.
The plea agreement also stipulates that, after 180 days, “the guilty plea in this case will be withdrawn, the guilty verdict will be set aside, the case will be dismissed, and the file will be sealed by the court.”
Meanwhile, Jeffrey Erman has entered not guilty pleas for the three charges filed against him, and a jury trial has been scheduled for Thursday, April 6. However, Eddy County State’s Attorney, Ashley Lies, has told the Transcript that negotiations on a potential plea agreement are still ongoing.