I disagree with you on this point. Urban area law enforcement in general do exactly what you have quoted here all the time, however from public property. It is impossible to conduct investigative police work in rural areas without going on private property. As long as they have probable cause, it is no different than a detective entering a private building after a long stakeout-because they have probable cause. There are many situations where a wildlife officer cannot do a stakeout from a public roadway, therefore they need the freedom to access private land when they have probable cause. You say they are not judge and jury implying that they should not be able to access private land without a warrant, but that is exactly what good police work does in urban areas. Without this, the only wildlife violations that can be investigated are ones that have prior permission. That means there is no ability to police wildlife law violaters that do so on their own property. Now those violaters have the freedom to bait for record book bucks without worry, maintain their own high fence area to raise record bucks without public knowledge, or bait with so much corn that there are no turkeys on neighboring farms. They can easily poach deer during archery season with a rifle, process it, discard the carcass, and register the deer as an archery kill. Granted, this can/does happen now. But there has been the deterent that they could get caught. Moving forward there is no deterent at all. This is a reality none of us want. The real issue here is that the officer should have gotten a warrant for the camera. That I agree with. But we will all suffer if wildlife officers are restricted from accessing private property when they have probable cause(only).