AGO 97-L-041.
Case Date | April 23, 1997 |
Court | North Dakota |
North Dakota Attorney General Opinions
1997.
AGO 97-L-041.
OPINION 97-L-41April 23, 1997Honorable Gary Nelson State Senator
2970 158th Avenue SE Casselton, ND 58012 Dear Senator Nelson:
Thank you for your letter regarding deer depredation problems.
Specifically you ask: whose responsibility is it to care for the deer; to whom
do the deer belong; is the burden of caring for the deer to fall on the
shoulders of the few, or is it the general responsibility of all citizens of
the state; and how far can farmers and ranchers go in protecting against the
destruction of their property.
I understand the importance of these problems to farmers and
ranchers, especially because of the severe 1996-97 winter. In your letter you
outline the concerns of farmers and ranchers about the welfare of the deer and
their complaints relating to deer depredation such as deer eating or ruining
livestock foodstuffs.
N.D.C.C. § 20.1-01-03 provides:
The ownership of and title to all wildlife within this state is
in the state for the purpose of regulating the enjoyment, use, possession,
disposition, and conservation thereof, and for maintaining action for damages
as herein provided. Any person catching, killing, taking, trapping, or
possessing any wildlife protected by law at any time or in any manner is deemed
to have consented that the title thereto remains in this state for the purpose
of regulating the taking, use, possession, and disposition thereof. The state,
through the office of attorney general, may institute and maintain any action
for damages against any person who unlawfully causes, or has caused within this
state, the death, destruction, or injury of wildlife, except as may be
authorized by law. The state has a property interest in all protected wildlife.
This interest supports a civil action for damages for the unlawful destruction
of wildlife by willful or grossly negligent act or omission. The director shall
adopt by rule a schedule of monetary values of various species of wildlife, the
values to represent the replacement costs of the wildlife and the value lost to
the state due to the destruction or injury of the species, together with other
material elements of value. In any action brought under this section, the
schedule constitutes the measure of recovery for the wildlife killed or
destroyed. The funds recovered must be deposited in the general fund, and
devoted to the propagation and protection of desirable species of wildlife.
The state's ownership interests are thereby limited to
"regulating the enjoyment, use, possession, disposition, and conservation" of
wildlife and to "maintaining action for damages" for the "willful or grossly...
To continue reading
Request your trial