## Facts

- In 1896, Carcajou Shooting Club obtained a recorded, perpetual right to hunt and fish on approximately 400 acres near Lake Koshkonong while another party retained title to the land.
- Over time, parts of the original tract were conveyed to new owners.
- In 1987, Vincent and Mary Jane Figliuzzi purchased a 42-acre parcel within the original tract; their deed referenced the club’s hunting and fishing rights, and they had notice of those rights at purchase.
- The Figliuzzis proposed a 26-unit condominium development with related amenities (including paths, recreation areas, and boat slips), which would substantially increase people, vehicle and boat traffic, and overall intensity of use.
- The club asserted the development would reduce wildlife habitat and materially impair the practical ability to exercise its hunting and fishing rights, and sought declaratory and injunctive relief.

## Issues

1. Whether Carcajou’s perpetual hunting and fishing rights constitute an “easement” within the meaning of Wis. Stat. § 893.33(6), exempting the rights from the 30-year limitation in § 893.33(2)–(3).
2. Whether the proposed condominium development would unreasonably interfere with the club’s hunting and fishing rights.

## Decision

- The Wisconsin Supreme Court reversed the court of appeals and reinstated the circuit court’s declaratory judgment for Carcajou.
- The court held the hunting and fishing rights fall within the statutory easement exception in Wis. Stat. § 893.33(6).
- The court held the proposed condominium development would unreasonably interfere with the club’s rights by substantially impairing conditions necessary for hunting and fishing (including wildlife presence and habitat).

## Legal Principles

- For purposes of Wis. Stat. § 893.33(6), hunting and fishing rights historically described as a profit à prendre are treated as an easement, and the statute’s easement exception applies.
- A recorded easement within § 893.33(6) is not extinguished by the 30-year limitation period applicable to certain real-estate claims under § 893.33(2)–(3).
- The servient estate owner may use the property in any manner consistent with the easement, but may not make changes that unreasonably interfere with the dominant holder’s ability to exercise the granted rights.
- A proposed development that significantly increases human activity and reduces wildlife habitat can constitute unreasonable interference with a hunting and fishing easement.

## Conclusion

The court enforced the club’s recorded perpetual hunting and fishing easement under Wisconsin’s recording and limitation statutes and barred the landowners’ planned condominium project because it would unreasonably interfere with the exercise of those rights.


Figliuzzi v. Carcajou Shooting Club of Lake Koshkonong, 516 N.W.2d 410 (Wis. 1994)