Dog deer hunters versus property owners

The dog-deer hunting lobby is going strong, but there is really no grounds for the hunters to hunt on private land. It is an inconvenience, even if gun shots are not aimed at houses and fences are not being damaged.

From http://www.andalusiastarnews.com/article...s/news03231.txt:
 
The landowners presented a resolution to the commission that would call for a referendum on the November ballot, allowing voters in the county to decide on the issue. According to Rodgers, the resolution does not call for a complete ban on dog deer hunting in the county, but would impose restrictions, such as limiting it to 1,500 acres or more. This would apply to private lands, since dog deer hunting is no longer allowed on public lands here.
(...) Rodgers spoke again, saying that he and his wife had been subjected to verbal abuse by dog deer hunters who were blocking the road. He said the hunters often came across his land "to get their deer or their dogs."

Proponents of dog deer hunting claimed that negative incidences were few and that not all hunters should be blamed for the misbehavior of a few. One pointed out that stores selling dog food would suffer.
 
As someone who is scared of the sounds of gunshots: it's very clear to me that the dog hunters have (literally) no grounds here. The current situation is based on years long gone, when the area was much more sparsely populated, and people didn't have the kind of monster trucks everybody is driving now.

09:47 AM